MétaCan
Menu
← all works

Graphical passwords

2012· review· en· 562 citations· W2126453598 on OpenAlex· 10.1145/2333112.2333114

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

Candidate categories
Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
Genre
Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score
0.996
Threshold uncertainty score
1.000
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread
0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Starting around 1999, a great many graphical password schemes have been proposed as alternatives to text-based password authentication. We provide a comprehensive overview of published research in the area, covering both usability and security aspects as well as system evaluation. The article first catalogues existing approaches, highlighting novel features of selected schemes and identifying key usability or security advantages. We then review usability requirements for knowledge-based authentication as they apply to graphical passwords, identify security threats that such systems must address and review known attacks, discuss methodological issues related to empirical evaluation, and identify areas for further research and improved methodology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
ACM Computing Surveys
Topic
User Authentication and Security Systems
Field
Computer Science
Canadian institutions
Carleton University
Funders
not available
Keywords
Computer scienceUsabilityPasswordPassword policyAuthentication (law)Computer securityCognitive passwordKey (lock)Human-computer interaction in information securityWorld Wide WebData scienceHuman–computer interactionInformation securityOne-time passwordNetwork security policySecurity service
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes