MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013184273 · doi:10.1145/3372420

Mimicry Attacks on Smartphone Keystroke Authentication

2020· article· en· W3013184273 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Privacy and Security · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKeystroke loggingComputer sciencePasswordKeystroke dynamicsAuthentication (law)Computer securityHuman–computer interactionS/KEY

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keystroke behaviour-based authentication employs the unique typing behaviour of users to authenticate them. Recent such proposals for virtual keyboards on smartphones employ diverse temporal, contact, and spatial features to achieve over 95% accuracy. Consequently, they have been suggested as a second line of defense with text-based password authentication. We show that a state-of-the-art keystroke behaviour-based authentication scheme is highly vulnerable against mimicry attacks. While previous research used training interfaces to attack physical keyboards, we show that this approach has limited effectiveness against virtual keyboards. This is mainly due to the large number of diverse features that the attacker needs to mimic for virtual keyboards. We address this challenge by developing an augmented reality-based app that resides on the attacker’s smartphone and leverages computer vision and keystroke data to provide real-time guidance during password entry on the victim’s phone. In addition, we propose an audiovisual attack in which the attacker overlays transparent film printed with spatial pointers on the victim’s device and uses audio cues to match the temporal behaviour of the victim. Both attacks require neither tampering or installing software on the victim’s device nor specialized hardware. We conduct experiments with 30 users to mount over 400 mimicry attacks. We show that our methods enable an attacker to mimic keystroke behaviour on virtual keyboards with little effort. We also demonstrate the extensibility of our augmented reality-based technique by successfully mounting mimicry attacks on a swiping behaviour-based continuous authentication system.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
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