Slashdot Mirror


Google Adds USB Security Keys To 2-Factor Authentication Options

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from VentureBeat: Google today announced it is beefing up its two-step verification feature with Security Key, a physical USB second factor that only works after verifying the login site is truly a Google website. The feature is available in Chrome: Instead of typing in a code, you can simply insert Security Key into your computer's USB port and tap it when prompted by Google's browser. "When you sign into your Google Account using Chrome and Security Key, you can be sure that the cryptographic signature cannot be phished," Google promises. While Security Key works with Google Accounts at no charge, you'll need to go out and buy a compatible USB device directly from a Universal 2nd Factor (U2F) participating vendor.

5 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Where is the NFC 2-factor? by DigitAl56K · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let me know when they start selling cheap NFC dongles so we can just tap our phone on them to login. I'm sure our company would buy a bunch. 2-factor makes logging in to conference systems a pain in the ass - everyone is always looking to the guy who doesn't use 2-factor to login already. I don't see how fumbling around with USB sticks is much better.

    1. Re:Where is the NFC 2-factor? by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't see how fumbling around with USB sticks is much better.

      I use a YubKey NEO-n. It's a tiny device, only extends from the USB port by a millimeter or so... just enough that you can touch it to activate it. I just leave it plugged into my laptop all the time, so there's no "fumbling with USB sticks", I just run my finger along the side of the laptop until it hits the key. It's extremely convenient.

      There's an obvious downside of leaving the key plugged into your laptop, of course. If someone steals your laptop they have your key. However, in order to make use of it they have to have (or guess) your password as well, so it's really only a risk if someone is specifically targeting you, in which case they could also steal your phone. Well, it's also a problem if you use a particularly lousy password, and if you don't notice that the laptop/key are gone soon enough that you can disable the key before the attacker guesses your password.

      FWIW, Google switched to using security keys for corporate account authentication a while ago. Google's security operations team determined that the risk of theft of a security key is actually lower in practice than the risk that an employee's phone-based OTP might be phished. I would have thought that Google employees were too smart to be phished... but I suppose resistance to phishing attacks is as much about social intelligence as anything else, and Google hires a lot of socially inept people.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  2. How does it secure against spoofing? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What keeps me (or my malware, respectively) from opening a google page in the background (i.e. not visible to the user by not rendering it but making Chrome consider it "open") and fool the dongle into recognizing it and the user into pressing the a-ok button?

    A machine that is compromised is no longer your machine. If you want two factor, use two channels. There is no way to secure a single channel with two factors sensibly.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Re:USB Device Recommendation by TWX · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, what is a good USB device for this?

    Probably one whose controller firmware hasn't been compromised...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  4. Re:Yet another Chrome-only technology by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's really sad to see Google turning inwards like this. What happened to working towards open standards for such things?

    Too true. Couldn't they have used an open standard like FIDO's U2F instead of using proprietary technology like...

    Wait, what was your objection again?