A second approach to dealing with deception is to train a machine-learning classifier on real customer behaviour. This is what credit-card fraud engines have been doing since the late 1990s, and recent research has pushed into other fields too. For example, Noam Brown and Tuomas Sandholm have created a poker-playing bot called Pluribus that beat a dozen expert players over a 12-day marathon of 10,000 hands of Texas Hold 'em. It doesn't use psychology but game theory, playing against itself millions of times and tracking regret at bids that could have given better outcomes. That it can consistently beat experts without access to ‘tells’ such as its opponents' facial gestures or body language is itself telling. Dealing with deception using statistical machine learning rather than physiological monitoring may also be felt to intrude less into privacy.
3.4 Passwords
The management of passwords gives an instructive context in which usability, applied psychology and security meet. Passwords have been one of the biggest practical problems facing security engineers since perhaps the 1970s. In fact, as the usability researcher Angela Sasse puts it, it's hard to think of a worse authentication mechanism than passwords, given what we know about human memory: people can't remember infrequently-used or frequently-changed items; we can't forget on demand; recall is harder than recognition; and non-meaningful words are more difficult.
To place the problem in context, most passwords you're asked to set are not for your benefit but for somebody else's. The modern media ecosystem is driven by websites seeking to maximise both their page views and their registered user bases so as to maximise their value when they are sold. That's why, when you're pointed to a news article that's so annoying you feel you have to leave a comment, you find you have to register. Click, and there's a page of ads. Fill out the form with an email address and submit. Got the CAPTCHA wrong, so do it again and see another page of ads. Click on the email link, and see a page with another ad. Now you can add a comment that nobody will ever read. In such circumstances you're better to type random garbage and let the browser remember it; or better still, don't bother. Even major news sites use passwords against the reader's interest, for example by limiting the number of free page views you get per month unless you register again with a different browser. This ecosystem is described in detail by Ryan Holiday [915].
Turning now to the more honest uses, the password system used by a big modern service firm has a number of components.
1 The visible part is the logon page, which asks you to choose a password when you register and probably checks its strength in some way. It later asks for this password whenever you log on.
2 There will be recovery mechanisms that enable you to deal with a forgotten password or even a compromised account, typically by asking further security questions, or via your primary email account, or by sending an SMS to your phone.
3 Behind this lie technical protocol mechanisms for password checking, typically routines that encrypt your password when you enter it at your laptop or phone, and then either compare it with a local encrypted value, or take it to a remote server for checking.
4 There are often protocol mechanisms to synchronise passwords across multiple platforms, so that if you change your password on your laptop, your phone won't let you use that service until you enter the new one there too. And these mechanisms may enable you to blacklist a stolen phone without having to reset the passwords for all the services it was able to access.
5 There will be intrusion-detection mechanisms to propagate an alarm if one of your passwords is used somewhere it probably shouldn't be.
6 There are single-signon mechanisms to use one logon for many websites, as when you use your Google or Facebook account to log on to a newspaper.
Let's work up from the bottom. Developing a full-feature password management system can be a lot of work, and providing support for password recovery also costs money (a few years ago, the UK phone company BT had two hundred people in its password-reset centre). So outsourcing ‘identity management’ can make business sense. In addition, intrusion detection works best at scale: if someone uses my gmail password in an Internet cafe in Peru while Google knows I'm in Scotland, they send an SMS to my phone to check, and a small website can't do that. The main cause of attempted password abuse is when one firm gets hacked, disclosing millions of email addresses and passwords, which the bad guys try out elsewhere; big firms spot this quickly while small ones don't. The big firms also help their customers maintain situational awareness, by alerting you to logons from new devices or from strange places. Again, it's hard to do that if you're a small website or one that people visit infrequently.
As for syncing passwords between devices, only the device vendors can really do that well; and the protocol mechanisms for encrypting passwords in transit to a server that verifies them will be discussed in the next chapter. That brings us to password recovery.
3.4.1 Password recovery
The experience of the 2010s, as the large service firms scaled up and people moved en masse to smartphones, is that password recovery is often the hardest aspect of authentication. If people you know, such as your staff, forget their passwords, you can get them to interact with an administrator or manager who knows them. But for people you don't know such as your online customers it's harder. And as a large service firm will be recovering tens of thousands of accounts every day, you need some way of doing it without human intervention in the vast majority of cases.
During the 1990s and 2000s, many websites did password recovery using ‘security questions’ such as asking for your favourite team, the name of your pet or even that old chestnut, your mother's maiden name. Such near-public information is often easy to guess so it gave an easier way to break into accounts than guessing the password itself. This was made even worse by everyone asking the same questions. In the case of celebrities – or abuse by a former intimate partner – there may be no usable secrets. This was brought home to the public in 2008, when a student hacked the Yahoo email account of US Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin via the password recovery questions – her date of birth and the name of her first school. Both of these were public information. Since then, crooks have learned to use security questions to loot accounts when they can; at the US Social Security Administration, a common fraud was to open an online account for a pensioner who's dealt with their pension by snail mail in the past, and redirect the payments to a different bank account. This peaked in 2013; the countermeasure that fixed it was to always notify beneficiaries of account changes by snail mail.
In 2015, five Google engineers published a thorough analysis of security questions, and many turned out to be extremely weak. For example, an attacker could get a 19.7% success rate against ‘Favourite food?’ in English. Some 37% of people provided wrong answers, in some cases to make them stronger, but sometimes not. Fully 16% of people's answers were public. In addition to being insecure, the ‘security questions’ turned out to be hard to use: 40% of English-speaking US users were unable to recall the answers when needed, while twice as many could recover accounts using an SMS reset code [292].
Given these problems with security and memorability, most websites now let you recover your password by an email to the address with which you first registered. But if someone compromises that email account, they can get all your dependent accounts too.