MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221082569 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.120103

Passnumbers: An Approach of Graphical Password Authentication Based on Grid Selection

2022· article· en· W4221082569 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seerwan Waleed Jirjees, Ali M. Mahmood

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPasswordComputer scienceCognitive passwordS/KEYPassword policyPassword strengthOne-time passwordComputer securityChallenge–response authenticationZero-knowledge password proofPassword crackingAuthentication protocol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authentication textual passwords are the most widely used technique. However, this type of legacy authentication is vulnerable to various attacks, such as shoulder-surfing attacks. Hence, graphical password authentication is one of these approaches which has been suggested to overcome the issues related to textual passwords. Nevertheless, the hackers have also developed new techniques that can be finally broken the graphical password, for instance, listening to the transmitted information between the client and the server. In this paper, Passnumbers graphical authentication password is proposed. Passnumbers approach involves two new stages, which are first, using the coordinates of a graphical grid cells-based numbers for entering the password. The second stage is represented by deploying a new technique to encrypt the password based on the image pixels. The performance evaluation reveals that the proposed Passnumbers can provide high resistance against several graphical password attacks including shoulder surfing and eavesdropping attacks. Passnumbers is evaluated using several metrics including security and usability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207