MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2881632231 · doi:10.1145/3210240.3210317

Augmented Reality-based Mimicry Attacks on Behaviour-Based Smartphone Authentication

2018· article· en· W2881632231 on OpenAlexafffund
Hassan Khan, Urs Hengartner, Daniel Vogel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceMimicryKeystroke dynamicsAuthentication (law)Keystroke loggingBiometricsComputer securityHuman–computer interactionPhoneFingerprint (computing)SoftwarePasswordOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop an augmented reality-based app that resides on the attacker's smartphone and leverages computer vision and raw input data to provide real-time mimicry attack guidance on the victim's phone. Our approach does not require tampering or installing software on the victim's device, or specialized hardware. The app is demonstrated by attacking keystroke dynamics, a method leveraging the unique typing behaviour of users to authenticate them on a smartphone, which was previously thought to be hard to mimic. In addition, we propose a low-tech AR-like audiovisual method based on spatial pointers on a transparent film and audio cues. We conduct experiments with 31 participants and mount over 400 attacks to show that our methods enable attackers to successfully bypass keystroke dynamics for 87% of the attacks after an average mimicry training of four minutes. Our AR-based method can be extended to attack other input behaviour-based biometrics. While the particular attack we describe is relatively narrow, it is a good example of using AR guidance to enable successful mimicry of user behaviour---an approach of increasing concern as AR functionality becomes more commonplace.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

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.

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

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207