Recognizing Your Own Handwriting As A Password

Gary writes "A new online authentication system called Dynahand could make logging in to websites a little easier. With Dynahand, users simply identify their own handwriting, instead of entering a cryptic password or buying a biometric device to scan their fingerprints. The user's handwriting samples contain only digits, since numerals are harder for an outside party to recognize than letters are. The digits displayed are random, so the handwriting is the only clue to the correct answer."

Comments

Re:Brute Force?

[SatanicPuppy]

Why bother? My desk is covered with my clearly recognizable scrawl, and most of it is numeric just to add insult to injury.

While the idea of a system that depends on recognition is interesting (though in my mind, not terribly secure for the exact reason you stated), handwriting is probably the poorest example because we leave handwriting samples everywhere. It'd be much more secure to have the system be "Recognize a picture of your own genitalia" because at least then you only have to worry about former significant others...And hell, for this crowd, you don't even have to worry about that.

Sometimes, simple is best

[pzs]

Passwords actually strike me as quite a good security method. A good password is difficult to guess by a person or by a machine and is very simple to implement, leaving less margin for error in the technology.

I know, I know, people forget their passwords or choose the word "password" all the time. It still seems a little depressing that we have to use all this extra trickery to compensate for people being morons.

Peter

have to hide my hand writing?

[janneH]

What, now I have to bring a typewriter everytime I go to the restaurant - to fill in the tip and total?

What a stupid concept

[Mock]

Here's how you crack it:

1. generate a bunch of new sessions to the login page.
2. Identify samples that appear more often than others.
3. Recognize the handwriting style.
4. Log in.

Re:Brute Force?

[necro81]

From parent post's link:

Renaud doesn't think Dynahand is secure enough for protecting sensitive information, such as bank accounts or health records. Rather, she believes it could be useful for social sites, where a user wants her account to be private but where nothing disastrous would happen if someone broke into it.

The folks at Dynahand obviously don't know how bad hijacking someone's social network identity could be. While not as sensitive as banking or medical information, access to one's online profile is a pretty sensitive thing. A person pretending to be you on MySpace or Facebook could cause all kinds of damage to your reputation, lose you (real) friends, and leave an incriminating trail for any future employer to find. Even if you are able to regain control of your account via customer service, and could remove the offending material from your page, nothing is every really deleted from the Internet.

Nothing to see here ...

[pz]

From the article's first paragraph:

You can't afford to be careless regarding the password coz you never know ...

And with that, I stopped reading. Why? Because I don't have enough time to read things that aren't written in at least passable English. If someone has a good idea, and are serious about it, they'll make the effort to communicate it well or have it communicated well for them.

Nothing to see in this article, and, by strong implication, a worthless idea.