To prevent password breaches and guessing attacks, banks increasingly turn to two-factor authentication (2FA), requiring users to present at least one more factor, such as a one-time password generated by a hardware token or received via SMS, besides a password. We can expect some solutions -- especially those adding a token -- to create extra work for users, but little research has investigated usability, user acceptance, and perceived security of deployed 2FA. This paper presents an in-depth study of 2FA usability with 21 UK online banking customers, 16 of whom had accounts with more than one bank. We collected a rich set of qualitative and quantitative data through two rounds of semi-structured interviews, and an authentication diary over an average of 11 days. Our participants reported a wide range of usability issues, especially with the use of hardware tokens, showing that the mental and physical workload involved shapes how they use online banking. Key targets for improvements are (i) the reduction in the number of authentication steps, and (ii) removing features that do not add any security but negatively affect the user experience.
Online banking. Just and Aspinall @cite_7 analysed the use of dual credential authentication for online banking from both security and usability points of view. They considered granularity and time of feedback given to users during the authentication steps as main usability properties, and found that some banks delayed feedback by not providing it at screen change, or provided granular feedback too late in the authentication process. They concluded that these issues are likely to confuse users, but did not conduct an actual user study. Our work complements @cite_7 as we conduct an in-depth user study aiming to understand authentication for online banking from the users' point of view. Also, while @cite_7 looked at dual credentials (e.g., two passwords, two PINs, or two challenge questions), we focus on actual 2FA.
@cite_7
1635927852 2019380907 2160343382 1955134710
This paper presents the results of a security and usability review of the authentication implementations used by more than 10 UK banks. Our focus is on their use of dual text credentials that combine two passwords, PINs, or challenge questions (and some “partial selection” variations). We model the authentication protocols based upon several deployment choices, such as the credential rules, and use the model to compare the security and usability properties of the implementations. Our results indicate some variation and inconsistency across the UK banking industry, from which we offer some suggestions for improved authentication protocol design. This paper describes an experiment to investigate user perceptions of the usability and security of single-factor and two-factor authentication methods in automated telephone banking. In a controlled experiment with 62 banking customers a knowledge-based, single-factor authentication procedure, based on those commonly used in the financial services industry, was compared with a two-factor approach where in addition to the knowledge-based step, a one-time passcode was generated using a hardware security token. Results were gathered on the usability and perceived security of the two methods described, together with call completion rates and call durations for the two methods. Significant differences were found between the two methods, with the two-factor version being perceived as offering higher levels of security than the single-factor authentication version; however, this gain was offset by significantly lower perceptions of usability, and lower ratings for convenience and ease of use for the two-factor version. In addition, the two-factor authentication version took longer for participants to complete. This research provides valuable empirical evidence of the trade-off between security and usability in automated systems. We evaluate Website authentication measures that are designed to protect users from man-in-the-middle, 'phishing', and other site forgery attacks. We asked 67 bank customers to conduct common online banking tasks. Each time they logged in, we presented increasingly alarming clues that their connection was insecure. First, we removed HTTPS indicators. Next, we removed the participant's site-authentication image--the customer-selected image that many Websites now expect their users to verify before entering their passwords. Finally, we replaced the bank's password-entry page with a warning page. After each clue, we determined whether participants entered their passwords or withheld them. We also investigate how a study's design affects participant behavior: we asked some participants to play a role and others to use their own accounts and passwords. We also presented some participants with security-focused instructions. We confirm prior findings that users ignore HTTPS indicators: no participants withheld their passwords when these indicators were removed. We present the first empirical investigation of site-authentication images, and we find them to be ineffective: even when we removed them, 23 of the 25 (92 ) participants who used their own accounts entered their passwords. We also contribute the first empirical evidence that role playing affects participants' security behavior: role-playing participants behaved significantly less securely than those using their own passwords. Two-factor authentication protects online accounts even if passwords are leaked. Most users, however, prefer password-only authentication. One reason why two-factor authentication is so unpopular is the extra steps that the user must complete in order to log in. Currently deployed two-factor authentication mechanisms require the user to interact with his phone to, for example, copy a verification code to the browser. Two-factor authentication schemes that eliminate user-phone interaction exist, but require additional software to be deployed. In this paper we propose Sound-Proof, a usable and deployable two-factor authentication mechanism. Sound-Proof does not require interaction between the user and his phone. In Sound-Proof the second authentication factor is the proximity of the user's phone to the device being used to log in. The proximity of the two devices is verified by comparing the ambient noise recorded by their microphones. Audio recording and comparison are transparent to the user, so that the user experience is similar to the one of password-only authentication. Sound-Proof can be easily deployed as it works with current phones and major browsers without plugins. We build a prototype for both Android and iOS. We provide empirical evidence that ambient noise is a robust discriminant to determine the proximity of two devices both indoors and outdoors, and even if the phone is in a pocket or purse. We conduct a user study designed to compare the perceived usability of Sound-Proof with Google 2-Step Verification. Participants ranked Sound-Proof as more usable and the majority would be willing to use Sound-Proof even for scenarios in which two-factor authentication is optional.