Performance and Usability Evaluation of Brainwave Authentication Techniques with Consumer Devices

IF 3 4区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security Pub Date : 2023-01-18 DOI:10.1145/3579356
Patricia Arias-Cabarcos, Matin Fallahi, Thilo Habrich, Karen Schulze, Christian Becker, Thorsten Strufe
{"title":"Performance and Usability Evaluation of Brainwave Authentication Techniques with Consumer Devices","authors":"Patricia Arias-Cabarcos, Matin Fallahi, Thilo Habrich, Karen Schulze, Christian Becker, Thorsten Strufe","doi":"10.1145/3579356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Brainwaves have demonstrated to be unique enough across individuals to be useful as biometrics. They also provide promising advantages over traditional means of authentication, such as resistance to external observability, revocability, and intrinsic liveness detection. However, most of the research so far has been conducted with expensive, bulky, medical-grade helmets, which offer limited applicability for everyday usage. With the aim to bring brainwave authentication and its benefits closer to real world deployment, we investigate brain biometrics with consumer devices. We conduct a comprehensive measurement experiment and user study that compare five authentication tasks on a user sample up to 10 times larger than those from previous studies, introducing three novel techniques based on cognitive semantic processing. Furthermore, we apply our analysis on high-quality open brainwave data obtained with a medical-grade headset, to assess the differences. We investigate both the performance, security, and usability of the different options and use this evidence to elicit design and research recommendations. Our results show that it is possible to achieve Equal Error Rates as low as 7.2% (a reduction between 68–72% with respect to existing approaches) based on brain responses to images with current inexpensive technology. We show that the common practice of testing authentication systems only with known attacker data is unrealistic and may lead to overly optimistic evaluations. With regard to adoption, users call for simpler devices, faster authentication, and better privacy.","PeriodicalId":56050,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security","volume":"26 1","pages":"1 - 36"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3579356","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Brainwaves have demonstrated to be unique enough across individuals to be useful as biometrics. They also provide promising advantages over traditional means of authentication, such as resistance to external observability, revocability, and intrinsic liveness detection. However, most of the research so far has been conducted with expensive, bulky, medical-grade helmets, which offer limited applicability for everyday usage. With the aim to bring brainwave authentication and its benefits closer to real world deployment, we investigate brain biometrics with consumer devices. We conduct a comprehensive measurement experiment and user study that compare five authentication tasks on a user sample up to 10 times larger than those from previous studies, introducing three novel techniques based on cognitive semantic processing. Furthermore, we apply our analysis on high-quality open brainwave data obtained with a medical-grade headset, to assess the differences. We investigate both the performance, security, and usability of the different options and use this evidence to elicit design and research recommendations. Our results show that it is possible to achieve Equal Error Rates as low as 7.2% (a reduction between 68–72% with respect to existing approaches) based on brain responses to images with current inexpensive technology. We show that the common practice of testing authentication systems only with known attacker data is unrealistic and may lead to overly optimistic evaluations. With regard to adoption, users call for simpler devices, faster authentication, and better privacy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消费类设备脑波认证技术的性能与可用性评估
脑电波已被证明在个体中具有足够的独特性,可以用作生物识别技术。与传统的身份验证方法相比,它们还提供了很有前途的优势,例如抵抗外部可观察性、可撤销性和内在活性检测。然而,到目前为止,大多数研究都是用昂贵、笨重的医用级头盔进行的,这些头盔在日常使用中的适用性有限。为了使脑电波认证及其好处更接近现实世界的部署,我们研究了使用消费设备的大脑生物识别技术。我们进行了一项全面的测量实验和用户研究,在一个比以前研究大10倍的用户样本上比较了五项认证任务,引入了三种基于认知语义处理的新技术。此外,我们对使用医用耳机获得的高质量开放脑电波数据进行了分析,以评估差异。我们调查了不同选项的性能、安全性和可用性,并利用这些证据得出设计和研究建议。我们的研究结果表明,根据大脑对图像的反应,使用当前廉价的技术,可以实现低至7.2%的等错误率(与现有方法相比,减少了68%-72%)。我们表明,只使用已知的攻击者数据测试身份验证系统的常见做法是不现实的,并且可能导致过于乐观的评估。在采用方面,用户要求更简单的设备、更快的身份验证和更好的隐私。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security
ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security Computer Science-General Computer Science
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security (TOPS) (formerly known as TISSEC) publishes high-quality research results in the fields of information and system security and privacy. Studies addressing all aspects of these fields are welcomed, ranging from technologies, to systems and applications, to the crafting of policies.
期刊最新文献
ZPredict: ML-Based IPID Side-channel Measurements ZTA-IoT: A Novel Architecture for Zero-Trust in IoT Systems and an Ensuing Usage Control Model Security Analysis of the Consumer Remote SIM Provisioning Protocol X-squatter: AI Multilingual Generation of Cross-Language Sound-squatting Toward Robust ASR System against Audio Adversarial Examples using Agitated Logit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1