Paper detail

DALock: Distribution Aware Password Throttling

Large-scale online password guessing attacks are wide-spread and continuously qualified as one of the top cyber-security risks. The common method for mitigating the risk of online cracking is to lock out the user after a fixed number ($K$) of consecutive incorrect login attempts. Selecting the value of $K$ induces a classic security-usability trade-off. When $K$ is too large a hacker can (quickly) break into a significant fraction of user accounts, but when $K$ is too low we will start to annoy honest users by locking them out after a few mistakes. Motivated by the observation that honest user mistakes typically look quite different than the password guesses of an online attacker, we introduce DALock a {\em distribution aware} password lockout mechanism to reduce user annoyance while minimizing user risk. As the name suggests, DALock is designed to be aware of the frequency and popularity of the password used for login attacks while standard throttling mechanisms (e.g., $K$-strikes) are oblivious to the password distribution. In particular, DALock maintains an extra "hit count" in addition to "strike count" for each user which is based on (estimates of) the cumulative probability of {\em all} login attempts for that particular account. We empirically evaluate DALock with an extensive battery of simulations using real world password datasets. In comparison with the traditional $K$-strikes mechanism we find that DALock offers a superior security/usability trade-off. For example, in one of our simulations we are able to reduce the success rate of an attacker to $0.05\%$ (compared to $1\%$ for the $10$-strikes mechanism) whilst simultaneously reducing the unwanted lockout rate for accounts that are not under attack to just $0.08\%$ (compared to $4\%$ for the $3$-strikes mechanism).

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.