Biometric techniques are often used as an extra security factor in authenticating human users. Numerous biometrics have been proposed and evaluated, each with its own set of benefits and pitfalls. Static biometrics (such as fingerprints) are geared for discrete operation, to identify users, which typically involves some user burden. Meanwhile, behavioral biometrics (such as keystroke dynamics) are well suited for continuous, and sometimes more unobtrusive, operation. One important application domain for biometrics is deauthentication, a means of quickly detecting absence of a previously authenticated user and immediately terminating that user's active secure sessions. Deauthentication is crucial for mitigating so called Lunchtime Attacks, whereby an insider adversary takes over (before any inactivity timeout kicks in) authenticated state of a careless user who walks away from her computer. Motivated primarily by the need for an unobtrusive and continuous biometric to support effective deauthentication, we introduce PoPa, a new hybrid biometric based on a human user's seated posture pattern. PoPa captures a unique combination of physiological and behavioral traits. We describe a low cost fully functioning prototype that involves an office chair instrumented with 16 tiny pressure sensors. We also explore (via user experiments) how PoPa can be used in a typical workplace to provide continuous authentication (and deauthentication) of users. We experimentally assess viability of PoPa in terms of uniqueness by collecting and evaluating posture patterns of a cohort of users. Results show that PoPa exhibits very low false positive, and even lower false negative, rates. In particular, users can be identified with, on average, 91.0 accuracy. Finally, we compare pros and cons of PoPa with those of several prominent biometric based deauthentication techniques.
Deauthentication is an important component of any authentication system. The widespread use of computing devices in daily life has underscored the need for zero-effort deauthentication schemes. However, the quest for eliminating user effort may lead to hidden security flaws in the authentication schemes. As a case in point, we investigate a prominent zero-effort deauthentication scheme, called ZEBRA, which provides an interesting and a useful solution to a difficult problem as demonstrated in the original paper. We identify a subtle incorrect assumption in its adversary model that leads to a fundamental design flaw. We exploit this to break the scheme with a class of attacks that are much easier for a human to perform in a realistic adversary model, compared to the na "ive attacks studied in the ZEBRA paper. For example, one of our main attacks, where the human attacker has to opportunistically mimic only the victim's keyboard typing activity at a nearby terminal, is significantly more successful compared to the na "ive attack that requires mimicking keyboard and mouse activities as well as keyboard-mouse movements. Further, by understanding the design flaws in ZEBRA as cases of tainted input, we show that we can draw on well-understood design principles to improve ZEBRA's security. Common authentication methods based on passwords, tokens, or fingerprints perform one-time authentication and rely on users to log out from the computer terminal when they leave. Users often do not log out, however, which is a security risk. The most common solution, inactivity timeouts, inevitably fail security (too long a timeout) or usability (too short a timeout) goals. One solution is to authenticate users continuously while they are using the terminal and automatically log them out when they leave. Several solutions are based on user proximity, but these are not sufficient: they only confirm whether the user is nearby but not whether the user is actually using the terminal. Proposed solutions based on behavioral biometric authentication (e.g., keystroke dynamics) may not be reliable, as a recent study suggests. To address this problem we propose Zero-Effort Bilateral Recurring Authentication (ZEBRA). In ZEBRA, a user wears a bracelet (with a built-in accelerometer, gyroscope, and radio) on her dominant wrist. When the user interacts with a computer terminal, the bracelet records the wrist movement, processes it, and sends it to the terminal. The terminal compares the wrist movement with the inputs it receives from the user (via keyboard and mouse), and confirms the continued presence of the user only if they correlate. Because the bracelet is on the same hand that provides inputs to the terminal, the accelerometer and gyroscope data and input events received by the terminal should correlate because their source is the same - the user's hand movement. In our experiments ZEBRA performed continuous authentication with 85 accuracy in verifying the correct user and identified all adversaries within 11s. For a different threshold that trades security for usability, ZEBRA correctly verified 90 of users and identified all adversaries within 50s.