MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999770140 · doi:10.1109/pst47121.2019.8949031

User Authentication Using Keystroke Dynamics via Crowdsourcing

2019· article· en· W2999770140 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

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

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeystroke dynamicsAuthentication (law)Computer scienceComputer securityPasswordKeystroke loggingVulnerability (computing)CrowdsourcingChallenge–response authenticationMulti-factor authenticationAuthentication protocolWorld Wide WebS/KEY

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of security breaches in North America are the result of stolen or weak credentials yet many businesses have not adapted their user authentication strategies to account for this vulnerability. This paper presents a preliminary study on a purely statistical keystroke dynamics authentication system that provides an additional layer of security on top of traditional username and password authentication. This form of authentication will reduce the threat of stolen or weak credentials for virtually any system which uses a standard keyboard for authentication. Our model produced an FRR and FAR as low as 2.54% and 0% respectively which is an improvement over other statistical keystroke dynamics authentication models.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207