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

Bank Customers Favor Birthdate PINs

Too many people use a date for their bank card PIN, giving attackers an edge in figuring out the number, reports Cambridge University researchers.

Why don't banks block overused or insecure passwords and PIN codes?

That's one question posed by a study conducted by Cambridge University security researchers Joseph Bonneau, Soren Preibusch, and Ross Anderson, who've conducted what they said is "the first-ever quantitative analysis of the difficulty of guessing four-digit banking PINs." Their research has implications not just for ATM cards, but also for any mobile device set to require a numeric password.

The big warning from their research is that based on current PIN-picking patterns, would-be attackers have a 9% chance of correctly guessing a person's ATM code.

How did the researchers reach that conclusion? Since banks don't share customers' PIN codes for statistical analysis purposes, the researchers turned to the leak of 32 million RockYou passwords, which includes 1.7 million four-digit sequences. In addition, they said that developer Daniel Amitay "graciously" shared a set of 200,000 iPhone unlock codes that he'd amassed. With all of that data in hand, they assessed PIN popularity using 25 factors, including whether the data included a date (in DDMM format), as well as whether numbers ascended, and also surveyed more than 1,000 people about their PIN-management habits.

[ As smartphones turn into wallets, the risk to your bank account rises. See What One-Time Passwords Could Do For Mobile. ]

The good news from the study is that "people are considerably more careful when choosing banking PINs" than passwords, said Bonneau in a blog post. "About a quarter stick with their bank-assigned random PIN and over a third choose their PIN using an old phone number, student ID, or other sequence of numbers which is, at least to a guessing attack, statistically random." Meanwhile, 5% use a numeric pattern--such as "3535"--while 9% use a visual pattern on the keypad. Both of those approaches have only a 2% chance of being guessed.

But the researchers found that 23% of users base their PIN on a date, "and nearly a third of these used their own birthday." What attacker could easily guess someone's birthdate or birth year? Actually, the answer is elementary. According to the survey conducted by the group, 99% of people surveyed said they carry something in their wallet--most often their driver's license--that lists their birthdate. As a result, attackers have a 9% chance of guessing a birthdate-based PIN code.

In other words, "a competent thief will gain use of a payment card once every 11 to 18 stolen wallets, depending on the proportion of banks using a denied PIN list," according to the researchers.

What can be done to strengthen four-digit PIN codes? For starters, the researchers propose blacklisting--that is, preventing users from selecting--100 specific PINs, including "0000" and "1010." Doing so would decrease the overall chance of an attacker guessing a PIN code to just 0.2%, yet numerous financial institutions apparently don't have such controls in place. "In both the U.S. and U.K. we found banks which allowed us to change to 1234," said Bonneau.

Another security-improvement recommendation is to prevent users from using their birthdates as a PIN code, although the researchers questioned whether such a control could be easily implemented. "Too many PINs can be interpreted as dates to blacklist them all, and customer-specific blacklisting using knowledge of the customer's birthday seems impractical," said Bonneau.

The Cambridge University researchers plan to present their related research paper, "A Birthday Present Every Eleven Wallets? The Security Of Customer-Chosen Banking PINs," at next week's Financial Cryptography and Data Security 2012 conference.

To protect company and customer data, we need to determine what makes it so vulnerable and appealing. We also need to understand how hackers operate, and what tools and processes they rely on. In our How (And Why) Attackers Choose Their Targets report, we explain how to ensure the best defense by thinking like an attacker and identifying the weakest link in your own corporate data chain. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Number 6
50%
50%
Number 6,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/23/2012 | 10:48:15 PM
re: Bank Customers Favor Birthdate PINs
No comment about how secure a 4 digit PIN is in the first place. Sure, blacklist 100 of those numbers, reducing the number of possible PIN's by 10% to only 900. Brilliant.

Do banks use 4 digit combination locks on their front doors?
How Attackers Could Use Azure Apps to Sneak into Microsoft 365
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  3/24/2020
Malicious USB Drive Hides Behind Gift Card Lure
Dark Reading Staff 3/27/2020
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
6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
Flash Poll
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
Data breaches and regulations have forced organizations to pay closer attention to the security incident response function. However, security leaders may be overestimating their ability to detect and respond to security incidents. Read this report to find out more.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-5527
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-30
When MELSOFT transmission port (UDP/IP) of Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series (all versions), MELSEC iQ-F series (all versions), MELSEC Q series (all versions), MELSEC L series (all versions), and MELSEC F series (all versions) receives massive amount of data via unspecified vectors, resource co...
CVE-2020-5551
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-30
Toyota 2017 Model Year DCU (Display Control Unit) allows an unauthenticated attacker within Bluetooth range to cause a denial of service attack and/or execute an arbitrary command. The affected DCUs are installed in Lexus (LC, LS, NX, RC, RC F), TOYOTA CAMRY, and TOYOTA SIENNA manufactured in the re...
CVE-2020-10940
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
Local Privilege Escalation can occur in PHOENIX CONTACT PORTICO SERVER through 3.0.7 when installed to run as a service.
CVE-2020-10939
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
Insecure, default path permissions in PHOENIX CONTACT PC WORX SRT through 1.14 allow for local privilege escalation.
CVE-2020-6095
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
An exploitable denial of service vulnerability exists in the GstRTSPAuth functionality of GStreamer/gst-rtsp-server 1.14.5. A specially crafted RTSP setup request can cause a null pointer deference resulting in denial-of-service. An attacker can send a malicious packet to trigger this vulnerability.