理解人为选择的pin:特征,分布和安全性

Ding Wang, Qianchen Gu, Xinyi Huang, Ping Wang
{"title":"理解人为选择的pin:特征,分布和安全性","authors":"Ding Wang, Qianchen Gu, Xinyi Huang, Ping Wang","doi":"10.1145/3052973.3053031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) are ubiquitously used in embedded computing systems where user input interfaces are constrained. Yet, little attention has been paid to this important kind of authentication credentials, especially for 6-digit PINs which dominate in Asian countries and are gaining popularity worldwide. Unsurprisingly, many fundamental questions (e.g., what's the distribution that human-chosen PINs follow?) remain as intact as about fifty years ago when they first arose. In this work, we conduct a systematic investigation into the characteristics, distribution and security of both 4-digit PINs and 6-digit PINs that are chosen by English users and Chinese users. Particularly, we, for the first time, perform a comprehensive comparison of the PIN characteristics and security between these two distinct user groups. Our results show that there are great differences in PIN choices between these two groups of users, a small number of popular patterns prevail in both groups, and surprisingly, over 50% of every PIN datasets can be accounted for by just the top 5%~8% most popular PINs. What's disturbing is the observation that, as online guessing is a much more serious threat than offline guessing in the current PIN-based systems, longer PINs only attain marginally improved security: human-chosen 4-digit PINs can offer about 6.6 bits of security against online guessing and 8.4 bits of security against offline guessing, and this figure for 6-digit PINs is 7.2 bits and 13.2 bits, respectively. We, for the first time, reveal that Zipf's law is likely to exist in PINs. Despite distinct language/cultural backgrounds, both user groups choose PINs with almost the same Zipf distribution function, and such Zipf PIN-distribution from one source (about which we may know little information) can be well predicted by real-world attackers by running Markov-Chains with PINs from another known source. Our Zipf theory would have foundational implications for analyzing PIN-based protocols and for designing PIN creation policies, while our security measurements provide guidance for bank agencies and financial authorities that are planning to conduct PIN migration from 4-digits to 6-digits.","PeriodicalId":20540,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security","volume":"145 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"55","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Human-Chosen PINs: Characteristics, Distribution and Security\",\"authors\":\"Ding Wang, Qianchen Gu, Xinyi Huang, Ping Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3052973.3053031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) are ubiquitously used in embedded computing systems where user input interfaces are constrained. Yet, little attention has been paid to this important kind of authentication credentials, especially for 6-digit PINs which dominate in Asian countries and are gaining popularity worldwide. Unsurprisingly, many fundamental questions (e.g., what's the distribution that human-chosen PINs follow?) remain as intact as about fifty years ago when they first arose. In this work, we conduct a systematic investigation into the characteristics, distribution and security of both 4-digit PINs and 6-digit PINs that are chosen by English users and Chinese users. Particularly, we, for the first time, perform a comprehensive comparison of the PIN characteristics and security between these two distinct user groups. Our results show that there are great differences in PIN choices between these two groups of users, a small number of popular patterns prevail in both groups, and surprisingly, over 50% of every PIN datasets can be accounted for by just the top 5%~8% most popular PINs. What's disturbing is the observation that, as online guessing is a much more serious threat than offline guessing in the current PIN-based systems, longer PINs only attain marginally improved security: human-chosen 4-digit PINs can offer about 6.6 bits of security against online guessing and 8.4 bits of security against offline guessing, and this figure for 6-digit PINs is 7.2 bits and 13.2 bits, respectively. We, for the first time, reveal that Zipf's law is likely to exist in PINs. Despite distinct language/cultural backgrounds, both user groups choose PINs with almost the same Zipf distribution function, and such Zipf PIN-distribution from one source (about which we may know little information) can be well predicted by real-world attackers by running Markov-Chains with PINs from another known source. Our Zipf theory would have foundational implications for analyzing PIN-based protocols and for designing PIN creation policies, while our security measurements provide guidance for bank agencies and financial authorities that are planning to conduct PIN migration from 4-digits to 6-digits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20540,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security\",\"volume\":\"145 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"55\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3052973.3053031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3052973.3053031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 55

摘要

个人识别号码(pin)在用户输入界面受限的嵌入式计算系统中被广泛使用。然而,很少有人关注这种重要的身份验证凭证,特别是在亚洲国家占主导地位并在全球范围内越来越受欢迎的6位数pin。不出所料,许多基本问题(例如,人类选择的pin遵循什么分布?)与大约50年前它们首次出现时一样完好无损。在这项工作中,我们对英语用户和中文用户选择的4位pin和6位pin的特征、分布和安全性进行了系统的调查。特别是,我们首次对这两个不同用户组之间的PIN特征和安全性进行了全面的比较。我们的研究结果表明,这两组用户在PIN选择上存在很大差异,少数流行的模式在两组中都占主导地位,令人惊讶的是,每个PIN数据集的50%以上都可以由前5%~8%的最受欢迎的PIN所占。令人不安的是,在当前基于pin的系统中,由于在线猜测比离线猜测更严重,较长的pin只能略微提高安全性:人为选择的4位pin可以提供大约6.6位的安全性来防止在线猜测,8.4位的安全性来防止离线猜测,而6位pin的这个数字分别是7.2位和13.2位。我们首次揭示了齐夫定律可能存在于pin中。尽管语言/文化背景不同,两个用户组都选择具有几乎相同Zipf分布函数的pin,并且这种来自一个来源的Zipf pin分布(我们可能知之甚少)可以被现实世界的攻击者通过使用来自另一个已知来源的pin运行马尔可夫链来很好地预测。我们的Zipf理论将对分析基于PIN的协议和设计PIN创建策略具有基础意义,而我们的安全措施为计划进行PIN从4位数字迁移到6位数字的银行机构和金融当局提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Understanding Human-Chosen PINs: Characteristics, Distribution and Security
Personal Identification Numbers (PINs) are ubiquitously used in embedded computing systems where user input interfaces are constrained. Yet, little attention has been paid to this important kind of authentication credentials, especially for 6-digit PINs which dominate in Asian countries and are gaining popularity worldwide. Unsurprisingly, many fundamental questions (e.g., what's the distribution that human-chosen PINs follow?) remain as intact as about fifty years ago when they first arose. In this work, we conduct a systematic investigation into the characteristics, distribution and security of both 4-digit PINs and 6-digit PINs that are chosen by English users and Chinese users. Particularly, we, for the first time, perform a comprehensive comparison of the PIN characteristics and security between these two distinct user groups. Our results show that there are great differences in PIN choices between these two groups of users, a small number of popular patterns prevail in both groups, and surprisingly, over 50% of every PIN datasets can be accounted for by just the top 5%~8% most popular PINs. What's disturbing is the observation that, as online guessing is a much more serious threat than offline guessing in the current PIN-based systems, longer PINs only attain marginally improved security: human-chosen 4-digit PINs can offer about 6.6 bits of security against online guessing and 8.4 bits of security against offline guessing, and this figure for 6-digit PINs is 7.2 bits and 13.2 bits, respectively. We, for the first time, reveal that Zipf's law is likely to exist in PINs. Despite distinct language/cultural backgrounds, both user groups choose PINs with almost the same Zipf distribution function, and such Zipf PIN-distribution from one source (about which we may know little information) can be well predicted by real-world attackers by running Markov-Chains with PINs from another known source. Our Zipf theory would have foundational implications for analyzing PIN-based protocols and for designing PIN creation policies, while our security measurements provide guidance for bank agencies and financial authorities that are planning to conduct PIN migration from 4-digits to 6-digits.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security How Discover a Malware using Model Checking Localization of Spoofing Devices using a Large-scale Air Traffic Surveillance System CoverUp: Privacy Through "Forced" Participation in Anonymous Communication Networks Session details: Password & Auth 1
×
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