Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Convincing My Company To Stop Using Passwords?

gurps_npc writes Any password policy sufficiently complex to be secure is too complex to remember so people write them down. Worse, company policy is to leave a message on your answering machine describing it — when the software uses a 6 number password to get your 8 letter/symbol/number/capital/no dupes (ever) real password. I want to suggest a better method. I want to go with a two factor system — either token based or phone based (LaunchKey, Clef, Nok Nok). Does anyone have any advice on specific systems — or points I should bring up? Or alternatives such as graphical based passwords?

247 comments

  1. Do you want to take the fall for the inevitable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your system will be breached. Do you get enough out of this to take the fall when that happens?

  2. It could be worse by rgbscan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh man, that's peanuts compared to my job. Our Cicso IP Phone VOICEMAIL has to be a 7 digit or longer password. And they block repeating numbers, obvious guesses like 867-5309 (or your own phone number). They block patterns like pressing the keypad diagonally or all the corners twice or whatever. AND you have to change it every 30 days. You better believe everyone keeps a post-it with their voicemail password right on their phone. It's a self-defeating system it's so complex.

    1. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just don't answer your voice mail.

    2. Re:It could be worse by Sperbels · · Score: 2

      Damn it. Now I have that song stuck in my head.

    3. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Simple fix: don't ever set your voicemail password.

      Advise everyone from clients to managers that you won't answer voicemail. They'll stop leaving messages eventually, either when they remember what you told them or when your mailbox gets full (because arbitrary limits are fun) or when they just finally give up on expecting you to reply to their messages.

      Then you don't have to remember anything, and the phone system admin has to clean up after the mess he made by deleting your old messages. If your company is so stodgy and over-encumbered as to have a system like this in place, that admin is so far removed from your that he can't do anything to you in retaliation anyway. And you probably don't ever need to answer your phone. Just make sure that if you're asked by upper management why you don't answer your VM, just tell the truth: the system is crap and your time is better spent not fighting with it.

    4. Re:It could be worse by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Which one? 0118999881999119725...3?

    5. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only cure is Too Many Cooks (too many cooks).

    6. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SMARF!

    7. Re:It could be worse by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

      I lost my voicemail password about 2 years ago, I quit checking voicemails. I figured out how to make the message light solid instead of blinking so I can comfortably ignore voicemail for years to come.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    8. Re:It could be worse by hawguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh man, that's peanuts compared to my job. Our Cicso IP Phone VOICEMAIL has to be a 7 digit or longer password. And they block repeating numbers, obvious guesses like 867-5309 (or your own phone number). They block patterns like pressing the keypad diagonally or all the corners twice or whatever. AND you have to change it every 30 days. You better believe everyone keeps a post-it with their voicemail password right on their phone. It's a self-defeating system it's so complex.

      What's the point of a 7 digit numeric PIN? That's only around 24 bits worth of entropy (even less since the attacker knows that it doesn't have well known patterns and repeated digits so he can exclude those from his search). So 7 digits provides no real protection against an offline password hash attack.

      And hopefully the phone system itself can prevent an online attack by locking out accounts that have had too many incorrect guesses.

      So what's the advantage of such a long numeric PIN?

    9. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We went to a similar setup so I simply changed my voice mail outgoing message to say "send me an email". My vm has been full for a few years, people know if I don't pick up don't bother waiting, just send an email. Much simpler.

    10. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      16 characters
      numbers
      lowercase
      uppercase
      symbols

      two of each min
      no more than three of one type in a row
      60 day timeout

      Yes I do work for the government

    11. Re:It could be worse by frisket · · Score: 1

      People still use voicemail?

    12. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or get a better phone system. I have never known my voicemail password. They just show up in my inbox and I listen to them on my PC, cell (they are just wav attachments), or hit the avaya app on the PC and it rings my phone and plays it there without needing the password.

    13. Re:It could be worse by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I used my VM password once. To log into the web interface and configure my VM to forward to email. Never logged in again. I'm supposed to change my outgoing message when I'm on vacation, but I never do. Nobody has complained.

      Though my out of office replies to the VM system come back undeliverable. Too bad you can't set out of office to not reply to DoNotReply@example.com.

    14. Re:It could be worse by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Or you could just let your voicemail fill up and never check it. I don't actually even know where my phone is. Last time I moved, it didn't get moved with me. I filed a ticket requesting it get moved and the queue it ended up said something to the effect of "We don't do that and we can't be bothered to requeue it to someone who can." I thought about it for all of about a second and decided I couldn't be bothered either. So I now have sitting on my desk a phone that never rings and never has voicemail. In my opinion, the perfect phone.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    15. Re:It could be worse by stoploss · · Score: 1

      Just don't answer your voice mail.

      Hell, years ago I decided to permanently unplug the phone at my desk.

      As long as the computer is functional, the phone at the desk is a solution in search of a problem unless you work in helldesk (in which case you have my sympathy).

      Anything that can't be answered in two sentences gets an email. Anything too laborious to email works better face to face in a meeting or conference call with all the stakeholders (i.e. not at my desk).

    16. Re:It could be worse by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      Job Security for the Consultant (likely outside)?

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    17. Re: It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fart Copter is better. TMC is highly over rated. Hell, even the Really Sharp Swords skit is better.

    18. Re:It could be worse by sconeu · · Score: 1

      The solution?

      Just pick up a phone,
      I'm always home,
      Call me any time...
      Dial 362-4360
      I lead a life of crime!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    19. Re:It could be worse by ShaunC · · Score: 1

      You've been calling Hezbollah tech support again?

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    20. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Black tape.

    21. Re:It could be worse by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Turn in your nerd card.

    22. Re:It could be worse by grub · · Score: 1


      Simple fix: don't ever set your voicemail password.

      I went over 10 years without enabling my dreaded voicemail, some people complained but I never budged. My current Director told me to set it up about six months ago. I did and used a random integer set from random.org as the password.

      I can honestly say "I forgot my voicemail password" and let the thing fill up.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    23. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a local internet provider here uses the customer's phone number for wireless router password and sets up new email accounts with a default password... a default password most never change.

    24. Re:It could be worse by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

      That's the combination to my luggage!

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    25. Re:It could be worse by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Anything that can't be answered in two sentences gets an email. Anything too laborious to email works better face to face in a meeting or conference call

      I had to work with a higher-up IT manager who "never reads e-mail" and works at a remote site; also, whenever I do send an e-mail, the reply is always "Call to discuss; I don't use e-mail".

      He doesn't do video conferencing either; in fact, it's impossible to schedule a meeting, because he either has no time available for that, or he misses the meeting appointment --- he never setup his voicemail box, says he doesn't use voicemail -- and it's sometimes difficult to get him on the phone as well.

      Also, if any work doesn't get done for their location, the central IT workers always gets scolded.

      He often makes crap up that he claims he asked us to do, and if we try to e-mail him anything he always ignores it or says "NO, call me to discuss.".

      Sometimes Not using the Phone is not an option.

    26. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man, that's peanuts compared to my job. Our Cicso IP Phone VOICEMAIL has to be a 7 digit or longer password. And they block repeating numbers, obvious guesses like 867-5309 (or your own phone number). They block patterns like pressing the keypad diagonally or all the corners twice or whatever. AND you have to change it every 30 days. You better believe everyone keeps a post-it with their voicemail password right on their phone. It's a self-defeating system it's so complex.

      And each time they reduce the available choice that are actually making it EASIER to crack.

    27. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess: Some executive read an article about password security, and created a policy that all passwords be at least 8 characters. The voicemail system only allowed up to a PIN up to 7 digits, which didn't conform to policy, and obviously the IT department had to get an exception to allow the shorter PIN, out of necessity.

    28. Re:It could be worse by Prune · · Score: 1

      Is that clip supposed to be funny, Chris? My gosh, whatever happened to British humor? From the heights of Monty Python and Benny Hill, it's been a precipitous fall to this.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    29. Re:It could be worse by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

      My employer's office has far too few conference rooms for face-to-face meetings. Instead, the company has an internal VOIP/XMPP server. (Though for a meeting with 4 or less people, we often just use our cubicles.) We have VOIP phones on our desks, though easier to use PC VOIP app.

      --
      Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
    30. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our Cicso IP Phone VOICEMAIL has to be a 7 digit or longer password.

      That's kind of odd - don't you have the feature where voicemail messages get converted to mp3 files and get sent to your inbox?

      I have no idea what my voicemail password is, because I never need to use it, ever.

    31. Re:It could be worse by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 2

      Sounds like it's time for a firing. At most companies, an employee that "doesn't use email" or "doesn't use voicemail" is quickly saying that they "don't work there anymore."

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    32. Re:It could be worse by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 2

      I don't know where you work, but at most places you'd be fired for refusing to set up voicemail. You work for the company, so making yourself unreachable to everyone in the company simply isn't going to fly. It's as stupid as saying "I don't write things down" or "I don't do work."

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    33. Re:It could be worse by stoploss · · Score: 1

      Sometimes Not using the Phone is not an option.

      Yes, you certainly have found a degenerate case. So degenerate, in fact, that I would have found different employment unless there was something magical about the other characteristics of this particular job.

      I learned long ago that getting requirements in writing is key, not least for the reasons you cited.

      Phone calls are horrible. You, too, have my sympathy.

    34. Re:It could be worse by steelfood · · Score: 1

      1-877-kars-4-kids.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    35. Re:It could be worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's less funny when taken out of context.

    36. Re:It could be worse by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Unless there wasn't crap comedy on TV during those days, and the IT Crowd is the only comedy to have come from the UK recently, you are spouting demonstrable nonsense.

    37. Re:It could be worse by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      That is awful. There is a certain class of security person who should never be given any responsibility. That approach is just another reason why effective security is difficult to implement, they have burned through any capital they may have had by wasting everyone's time on a near-useless measure.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    38. Re:It could be worse by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of context missing in this episode. This itself isn't funny, but the effort of emailing the fire department because they couldn't remember the number later on was quite funny, even more so when the fire department actually showed up an hour later.

    39. Re:It could be worse by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      Where I work, everyone's voice mail is full because the voice mail system sends them an e-mail with the message as an attachment.

      Everyone listens to the message (and acts on it if necessary), but nobody deletes the message from the voice mail system.

    40. Re:It could be worse by darenw · · Score: 1

      Cutting out so many patterns - what does that leave? How many bits entropy less?

      What if such a policy is in place but randomly allows some exceptions? Then a cracker won't know if such patterns should be tried or not. Allow the patterns with the same probability that they'd have for truly random sequences. It'd be pointless, but in a way that would impress non-technical executives.

      For long enough passwords and PINs, it's likely that less than half of all possible sequences could be considered patterns of any kind. So, only one bit lost at most. But on a touchtone telephone pad, there aren't that many ways to go after one button, and a lot of sequences might arguably look like patterns. Overzealous pattern prevention including geometric patterns on the keypad and numbers with meaning or patterns to the digits, along with dainty short passwords might be a problem. How can this be quantified? Is there a real problem?

  3. First things first by dollar99 · · Score: 2

    As soon as you succeed with the paperless office, and don't forget to get rid of the fax machine too, then it'll be time for the password-less office. Just sayin'

    1. Re:First things first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First things first

      You're the realest?

    2. Re:First things first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can do that. its pretty much free these days.

      yes, really. learn or lose your job to a fresh-faced ignorant (but less ignorant than you!) college kid.

  4. Cost by axlash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have you considered how much it will cost your company to implement and manage such a solution?

    You'll need to be able to convince management that the likelihood and impact of your company's IT infrastructure is high enough to justify such an expense.

    --
    Deal with reality - the world as it is - rather than ideality - the world as you would like it to be.
    1. Re:Cost by brunes69 · · Score: 1

      Find out the cost of IT constantly resetting forgotten passwords and also the projected cost of a security breach because everyone has to write them down.

      If you want a REAL wake up call, pay a college kid $100 to show up to the office with a tool belt and tell the front desk he is there to check out the thermostat, and get him to grab a password off of a post-it note on someones desk. Bring that password to your director and say that if you wanted to, you cold have just cost your department X hundred thousands of dollars.

    2. Re:Cost by Xolotl · · Score: 2

      Quick way to get fired ...

    3. Re:Cost by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      Damned white knights :)

    4. Re:Cost by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      People are the weakest link. Social Engineering is the best cracking tool available.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try this:
      "We don't want to be the next Sony"

  5. Consider Your User Base by AaronLS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anything you do that adds an additional step to an existing process they "appears" to be working perfectly fine will potentially earn you some enemies. Some of the people most likely to be frustrated by the process may also be in positions of great influence.

    A noble cause, but its success depends a lot on the existing culture of your workplace.

    Certainly coming to the table with a well thought out argument in favor of this isn't bad.

    But if the culture is right, you should be able to bring this up casually with superiors and discuss it with them candidly and THEN discuss putting together a formal document proposing a solution. If anything they are better equipped than we are to evaluate the user needs of the workplace and give you ideas of how to pitch this to the rest of the business.

    1. Re:Consider Your User Base by mlts · · Score: 1

      The first time any glitches happen with the authentication system (and they will), the people mentioned by the parent will come down like a ton of bricks, asking why a system that costs productivity without obvious security merits is in place.

      Replacing a core authentication mechanism takes a lot of buy-in, not just from management, but by users who have management's ear. One "this is keeping me from doing my work" E-mail from someone with some cloud in a company can sink a project like this.

    2. Re:Consider Your User Base by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The way I did it was similar.

      In casual conversations with managers about "cool geek" stuff, I shared stories about breaches and the consequences. Those were particularly scary because we're a law firm.

      I sent breach stories to them via email saying, "These are things you should do for your HOME."

      I spoon fed that stuff to the decision makers and then when I was ready to roll out best practice and mid-lower management and my coworkers bitched, upper management was all like, "Are you kidding? Do you guys ever actually read about password security or network breaches? This stuff he's recommending is a no-brainer!"

      Done.

      I have had some who balked and I just told them to comply or send upper management an email arguing their business case for using "12345678" as a password.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Consider Your User Base by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      My first though is all the times I need to use a password where a physical device can not be used. Ie, log into my email from home over a web-only https connection. I can't wave a token at the web page, it wants me to type in the password. Similarly the same password is used when I use the email from my phone, and I presume it could use some expensive app but it's MY phone and I'd rather not get email than be forced install someone else's app.

      Right now there is not the functionality and technology to be able to get rid of passwords, at least in the pragmatic sense. Sure, there may be a solution for one person on one computer, but there is no standard in place to allow this to work easily across a full corporation and the large number of devices and services. This is yet again another of those silly Slashdot things where a person is not asking a sincere question but instead proclaiming "I am technologically more advanced than all the dinosaurs."

    4. Re:Consider Your User Base by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      That's genius right there Cap. Lawyers can be among the most challenging clients to support.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    5. Re:Consider Your User Base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have had some who balked and I just told them

      1) get photo or video of co-worker balking

      2) post on Internet

      ...

      3) profit!!!!

    6. Re: Consider Your User Base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US military uses smart cards for logging into basically everything. Give it the wrong pin three times and it locks. Also works as the I'd card.

    7. Re: Consider Your User Base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes sense. I think the same is true for debit card PIN guesses, with a 24 hour lock if wrong.

    8. Re: Consider Your User Base by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I meant three guesses before being locked. (Replying to my post.)

    9. Re:Consider Your User Base by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Totally inappropriate on so many levels.

      My workplace has a policy that prohibits recording on the premises using any electronic method without written permission from me. This includes, but is not limited to, deposition and mediation.

      We also have a policy that disallows removal of work product to offsite.

      Common sense would inform that it's not nice to piss off your coworkers.

      In a law firm, dirty laundry is a controlled substance.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    10. Re:Consider Your User Base by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Because it's all about that User Base, User Base, so much Trouble....

      I want a Meghan Trainor/All Your Base Belong to Us mashup.

    11. Re:Consider Your User Base by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

      The system I am considering works fine over the internet. Specifically, the commercially available phone linked technology lets you take a picture of your screen with your cellphone, using software installed on the cellphone. Then it sends a text message that unlocks your account, just as if you had entered a password.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  6. Make the business case by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Figure out how much time and effort tech support spends on dealing with forgotten or compromised passwords.
    Factor in the time lost by employees while they wait for tech support to deal with password problems.
    Find some research discussing the cost of a compromise.

    Figure out how much a token based system will cost. Assume people will lose their tokens.
    Make the case that your solution is cheaper than the existing solution.

    Then prepare to deal with "but we won't get compromised, so this is a waste of money"

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:Make the business case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dingdingding. 'Business case' are the magic words.

    2. Re:Make the business case by rjstanford · · Score: 2

      Make the case that your solution is cheaper than the existing solution if it is in fact cheaper.

      It may not be. Don't assume that everyone who came before you is an idiot - they may well have ended up where they are now due to a series of compromises to work around issues that you know nothing about. Why not ask someone who's been involved in the security decisions for a few years why things are the way that they are first?

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    3. Re:Make the business case by mlts · · Score: 1

      Of course, there is the issue of getting locked out by forgetting one's PIN. Again, picking on SecurID, people forget if they put their PIN before the number or after, so this can blow one password entry attempt. Fumble-finger again, and that can easily use up three attempts, locking someone out indefinitely.

      Don't forget scenarios. The senior sales person is out at a client site, he lost his token, and has to have access to the internal company's network for some charts or demos, or else he may lose a sale. How is this handled? SecurID can handle lost tokens via remote. Other token systems like the old SafeNet eToken Pros can have the device password/PIN recovered via a challenge/response system, but it takes some IT planning to have that set up and running.

    4. Re:Make the business case by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      if it is in fact cheaper.

      Well, it doesn't have to be cheaper if you can sell some VP or an influencer on the idea of never having to enter a password again.
      "Cheaper" is just the easiest way to argue your cause. "It's worth the extra money" is usually harder, but not always when it's some gee whiz technology stuff that the users will physically interact with.

      Why not ask someone who's been involved in the security decisions for a few years why things are the way that they are first?

      The answer is almost always inertia.
      Someone setup (or worse, paid consultants to set up) the current system and that's what everyone is stuck with because no one will/can propose anything better.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    5. Re:Make the business case by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Don't assume that everyone who came before you is an idiot - they may well have ended up where they are now due to a series of compromises to work around issues that you know nothing about.

      Compromises like idiot promotion? But seriously, usually the idiot is not the person you think is the idiot. Someone usually tied their hands.

      On the other hand, if it walks like an idiot, and quacks like an idiot...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 2

    use u2f, its the best authentication token on the market. Either as second factor, or as lone factor. It doesn't enforce any lock-in at all, and its experience is just like keys: you have cheap tiny things you stick into holes (please spare me with any childish dick/buttplug/etc comparisons).

    If they only need to survive online attacks, the 8 character limit is enough for Passwords. However you would need to add some meaningful brute-force and weak pw recognition.

    1. Re:U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      Oh I've forgotten U2F's best point: its cheap.

    2. Re:U2F by Buck+Feta · · Score: 0

      you have cheap tiny things you stick into holes (please spare me with any childish dick/buttplug/etc comparisons).

      You're the only one who made such comparisons, child.

      --
      I am Audience.
    3. Re:U2F by nine-times · · Score: 1

      However you would need to add some meaningful brute-force and weak pw recognition.

      A lot of systems and settings to prevent "weak passwords" are pretty dumb. I've seen things that failed to have a problem with me using my own username (or 'password') as a password as long as I substituted in some symbols and added numbers. So "P@ssw0rd" is fine but "correcthorsebatterystaple" is not allowed.

    4. Re:U2F by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      Best on the market? Errm, it has a bunch of deal-killer restrictions. It requires that the device that you're trying to log in on have USB ports (sorry smartphone/tablet users) and you need to carry around a physical token for you to lose/forget instead of having an app on your smartphone. And while it doesn't require any software be pre-installed on the computer (since the device basically simulates a keyboard), it still requires that the system be configured to let random keyboards/USB devices be plugged in.

    5. Re:U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      The app also needs to be installed on a smartphone, which you can also lose/forget. If the app allows you to log in from arbitrary devices, its just passwords again.

    6. Re:U2F by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      The smartphone can be lost/forgotten, but at least smartphones tend to be encrypted/locked with the option to remote-wipe. A U2F dongle that is lost would seem to offer no such protection.

      The apps for 2FA services tend to offer a rotating key, so it's not a fixed password that can be guessed.

    7. Re:U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      The smartphone can be lost/forgotten, but at least smartphones tend to be encrypted/locked with the option to remote-wipe. A U2F dongle that is lost would seem to offer no such protection.

      What is a phone encrypted/locked with? A password. So thats a second factor. Whether you enter it at the companies computer or at the smartphone is no big difference. As a company, I wouldnt rely my security on unlock passwords. How often do you enter your unlock password when other people could, in theory, watch you? How can you as company ensure your employees do this never?

      Same for remote-wipe. You set it up with a password. When your dongle (or phone) is lost you don't even need remote wipe, as you can simply call your employer and say it was lost (I admit if you use your dongle for more than just one party it can be a bit of work). With remote-wipe you can never be sure whether the attacker didn't crack the phone, and now just sent a fake "I'm wiped" message.

      The apps for 2FA services tend to offer a rotating key, so it's not a fixed password that can be guessed.

      With passwords I've meant what I've described in the upper paragraphs. Those rotating keys are yet another thing U2F is better at. Do you want to copy supid strings from your phone to your computer? Also, this kind of 2FA is dangerous, as its only time based and allows for MiTM attacks. U2F protects from those too by also authenticating the server.

    8. Re:U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      it still requires that the system be configured to let random keyboards/USB devices be plugged in.

      I'm sure that when the need arises, some smart company will develop an USB adapter that only allows U2F devices to communicate with the host.

    9. Re:U2F by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      What is a phone encrypted/locked with? A password.

      And what is the U2F protected by? Nothing. Anybody who gets hold of the dongle can use it, at least getting into the system protected by a mobile app would require them to steal the device *AND* get the password. And not all phones are locked with a password. There are phones locked with biometrics, or patterns that couldn't quite be called a password.

      As a company, I wouldn't rely my security on unlock passwords.

      So you wouldn't rely on a system that requires a device be stolen and then its password cracked, but you WOULD rely on a system that only requires the device be stolen with no password required?

      How often do you enter your unlock password when other people could, in theory, watch you?

      Once every few weeks, maybe every few months. I'm not using a password as the primary means to unlock my device.

      With remote-wipe you can never be sure whether the attacker didn't crack the phone

      With a dongle, you can be 100% sure that the thief has instant and complete access, because there isn't even a password to protect it.

      and now just sent a fake "I'm wiped" message.

      Do you have any evidence that it is possible to spoof the success of remote wipe on a modern smartphone running the current operating systems? On top of this, there is also the possibility of de-authorizing the device on the server-side with the 2FA provider.

      Do you want to copy supid strings from your phone to your computer?

      Considering how much more secure the system is than a USB dongle that anybody can grab and plug in, yes. Very much so.

      U2F protects from those too by also authenticating the server.

      It authenticates that somebody plugged in my dongle. It doesn't authenticate that I was the one who did it.

    10. Re:U2F by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 0

      Assuming that a basic English vocabulary has 30,000 words, four-word passphrases allows just 30k^4 combinations. That's the equivalent of a system that requires a 5 letter lower-case non-dictionary password. You get more combinations from just two random upper/lower/numbers/punctuation characters.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    11. Re: U2F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, your math seems off. 30,000^4 = 8*10^17. 26^5 is a mere 11 million.

    12. Re:U2F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      phones are compromised. Apps are a solution to the wrong problem.

    13. Re:U2F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30k^4 = 810000000000000000. 26^5 = 11881376

      But most people use only 2000 or so words as the estimate. Which is still 16000000000000. Which is more secure than 9 random lowercase digits or 7 random alpha/symbol/numerics using a pool of 75 characters.

    14. Re:U2F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      re-do your maths.
      30k^4 is 810 quadrillion
      25^5 is less than 12 million

    15. Re:U2F by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      And what is the U2F protected by? Nothing. Anybody who gets hold of the dongle can use it, at least getting into the system protected by a mobile app would require them to steal the device *AND* get the password. And not all phones are locked with a password. There are phones locked with biometrics, or patterns that couldn't quite be called a password.

      All those mechanisms can also be implemented by the company as a first factor. Indeed, a system with dongle only is insecure, but security is increased when you have 2 factor.

      TFS is about "passwordless authentication". When people are on the "no passwords" train they should consider that phones also have passwords. What they want to say is perhaps they want a master password. But thats something else.

      On top of this, there is also the possibility of de-authorizing the device on the server-side with the 2FA provider.

      You can do the same with a dongle, I've already pointed that out.

  8. Cost savings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Justify the cost savings and the costs to procure the 2-factor auth system. Can you show a sure reduction in help desk support for forgotten passwords? Don't forget that if you are just shifting support costs somewhere else (like replacing lost auth tokens) to show that cost and how it is still less than having passwords.

  9. Can the 2FA be put on the edge? by mlts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The reason I wonder if 2FA can be at least moved to the edge or used for VPN logins is that it makes things a lot less of a headache.

    Usually for internal AD, having a third party authentication apparatus strapped on can bring about issues. For example, if the system is a challenge/response system and a Web app is authenticating from AD, it likely won't have a window to present the 2FA challenge. SecurID is the only one I know which gets around this since there is no challenge token presented... users just enter in their password and the number off their token, and it logs them in with the standard username/password box. However, the downside of SecurID is that it is not cheap, and requires at least two servers to authenticate the tokens.

    Internal logins, I'd just stick with AD unless there was really a need for internal security (expensive). If so, I'd then go with CAC/PIV tokens because they are fairly standard, have a wide use with the US government, and work with most major applications.

    Now the edge is a completely different beast. You can set up RADIUS servers to use the Google Authenticator, SecurID, smart cards, or one's flavor of choice. This way, users can log in via 2FA, but the internal network doesn't need to have any major changes done to it.

  10. Douchbags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The place I'm currently at makes me use a 20 character password with characters from at least 3 of 4 groups (numbers, lower case, capitals, punctuation), and to change it every 45 days, and the last 30 passwords cannot be reused. Clearly everyone uses a 'password system' that makes this more insecure, even though it is explicitly denied. Worse, for remote access we have to use three factor authentication (password, pin and RSA token code) anyway. Why can we not just use two factor throughout?

    The same company blocks web access to dictionary.com, archive.org and anything related to computer security (hacking) and 3D graphics (games), as well as anything deemed to be file sharing (dropbox, google drive, pastebin - but not gist.github.com or thousands of other similar sites).

    Why are such douchebags in charge of IT at such large companies that employ technically competent staff?

     

    1. Re:Douchbags by Venotar · · Score: 1

      I'm going to go with narrow mindedness, or perhaps a lack of imagination. The requirements that led your IT leaders to the environment you describe could lead to far less onerous (and less costly!) setups.
      Blocking "all" filesharing sites? If your company is like mine, both federal regulators and clients regularly perform third party security audits. "How do you protect our data from exfiltration?" is a stock question. I've also seen "demonstrate you block viral vectors" lead to similarly unnecessary restrictions. Hell, I could see the above two answers explaining ALL of the symptoms your leadership has created.
      It doesn't have to go that way, though. Leadership at my company had the same silly knee jerk reaction. I argued against it; but we did the same thing, for a while. About 15 months. It took 12 months for me to accumulate comparative data and about a month to polish it into a pretty presentation. It took another 2 months to cross fiscal quarters and then we immediately ripped all that none sense out and replaced it with a properly architected solution. We moved the critical data and all the workflow that touched it into secured remote VM's running on in house Virtual Desktop Infrastructure. All desktops/laptops are basically dumb terminals for accessing the work VMs. You VPN in to do that, regardless of where you come from - including our "internal" office vlans, which only have access to the internet and our VPN server.
      Have work to do? Use your VM. Wanna fuck around on slashdot? Use your local machine.
      Problem solved, and with MONUMENTALLY fewer man hours spent managing the ridiculously complex filtering mechanisms the previous authoritarianism had required.

    2. Re:Douchbags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called best practices. Deviate and it's your ass when (not if) it fails. Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM and nobody ever got fired for onerous password requirements.

    3. Re:Douchbags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Find a different job.

    4. Re:Douchbags by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      The same company blocks web access to dictionary.com, archive.org and anything related to computer security (hacking) and 3D graphics (games), as well as anything deemed to be file sharing (dropbox, google drive, pastebin - but not gist.github.com or thousands of other similar sites).

      Why are such douchebags in charge of IT at such large companies that employ technically competent staff?

      It, like everything else, is about breaking even in terms of time versus exposure.

      You can block the top 10 file sharing/storage sites (drive, dropbox, whatever) in 10 minutes, and prevent 95% of your employees from transferring files. Or, to get to 99%, you can spend a couple hours a week adding new sites to the list. Want 99.5%? Just hire a full-time guy to review every TLD visited by employees.

    5. Re:Douchbags by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I've generally come to the conclusion, that it isn't IT that is doing this, but Clueless Executives demanding IT do this, even after repeated cries from the IT department not to do it.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    6. Re:Douchbags by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      The place I'm currently at makes me use a 20 character password with characters from at least 3 of 4 groups (numbers, lower case, capitals, punctuation), and to change it every 45 days, and the last 30 passwords cannot be reused. Clearly everyone uses a 'password system' that makes this more insecure, even though it is explicitly denied. Worse, for remote access we have to use three factor authentication (password, pin and RSA token code) anyway. Why can we not just use two factor throughout?

      The same company blocks web access to dictionary.com, archive.org and anything related to computer security (hacking) and 3D graphics (games), as well as anything deemed to be file sharing (dropbox, google drive, pastebin - but not gist.github.com or thousands of other similar sites).

      Why are such douchebags in charge of IT at such large companies that employ technically competent staff?

      CYA; for instance, if you work at a healthcare related company, with the healthcare information privacy protection act they can be seriously damaged if they let private healthcare info out to the wrong people; even leaving a message on somebody's voicemail can be questionable. So, if you set up insanely difficult security, when the inevitable leaks happen, your lawyer just tells the court that the company has done everything possible and they're off the hook. Otherwise, they're screwed, even though whatever they failed to do had nothing to do with the leak.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  11. Re by stephanruby · · Score: 2

    What ever happens!! Do not start your proposal with "Let's stop using passwords."

    Besides, in every system I've seen with 2-factor authentication, passwords could still be used, but 2-factor authentication would only get triggered if the employee was accessing the network from an unknown computer, or an unknown ip address, or if the employee had forgotten his original password.

    1. Re:Re by Greyfox · · Score: 2
      Yeah! Instead, start it "Did you know you can use your willy to unlock you Iphone's fingerprint scanner*?" It sells itself!

      * I'm told. I have an android phone.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:Re by phorm · · Score: 1

      "would only get triggered if the employee was accessing the network from an unknown computer"

      A stolen or compromised computer is still a *known* computer.

  12. Re:Do you want to take the fall for the inevitable by houstonbofh · · Score: 3, Funny

    Not to mention that stabbing yourself in the eye with a pencil will probably be less painful and result in more real security. And at least the eye-pencil is likely to make it to completion.

  13. Every 30 days. by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 2

    My favorite part is having to change the password every 30 days.

    A LOT of people will use base password+date. EG:
    Slashdotnov2014
    Slashdot1114
    etc.

    Gee. I wonder what it might be in December...

    I even know people in IT with passwords like that. When setting up a new computer for you they'll ask for your username/password so they can log in and setup your profile, so they are well aware that people do that.

    1. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that obnoxious password rituals requiring monthly changes and ridiculous combinations of numbers and symbols do not take into account the needs of the users of the system, only the needs of the system administrator. Users can't remember long strings of symbols, and never a lot of them, so users take the minimum effort to get their work done and be productive. They use obvious sequentially altered strings, and then write the fucking ridiculous corp mandated password on a post-it note.

      A token would solve the entire problem. Put it on a name badge and you've also solved the "not wearing ID" problem.

    2. Re:Every 30 days. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      They would probably come up with a compromise: Print your username and password on your id badge.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    3. Re:Every 30 days. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A password doesn't need to be overly complex to avoid brute force cracking, just sufficiently long. Most people are incapable of remember past 7 to 10 random character sequences. And any password system with limited character lengths is insufficient against brute force attacks.

      And technology based ID systems are okay, if they are two factored solutions, which usually makes it much more difficult for automated verification processes.

      My personal preference for most people is to have three or four sufficiently long random words as a password with a few random numbers and special characters: 7Alligator7Romances7Tombstone!

      This is sufficient for all use cases, as long as it isn't shared. Generating a new password is as simple as finding three random words. In my example above, a person would only have to remember 5 things, three words, 1 number, one punctuation

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    4. Re:Every 30 days. by N!k0N · · Score: 2

      Or, you can just use "Horse Battery-Staple Correct!"

    5. Re:Every 30 days. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Informative

      When setting up a new computer for you they'll ask for your username/password so they can log in and setup your profile, so they are well aware that people do that.

      Asking a user for their password is against corporate policy at all the Fortune 500 companies that I worked for in Silicon Valley. The correct procedure is to inform the user that their password will get reset to a temporary password (i.e., Password123), and, after setting up their new system, check on the box on the AD account for the user to change their password when logging in. Under no circumstances should an I.T. technician know a user's passwords. That's ground for immediate termination.

    6. Re:Every 30 days. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      Why do random words? Use a sentence. I do that for many of my passwords. You get upper and lower case letters, symbols, and maybe even numbers, and it's not hard to go past 20 characters. It's highly customizable for each user and much easier to remember.

      The problem with this is that there are still too many systems that have length caps that are too short. Not really many solutions for limits of 16, 10, or even 8 characters.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    7. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did a course, a number of years ago, that forced me to change my password on a monthly basis.

      Were they securing research data? Confidential records?

      No.

      They were securing Autodesk Maya 2010, and Adobe CS5. Our data was stored on external discs, and we had absolutely no network access.

      When asked why we had no internet access, we were told that you couldn't hook up two different speed networks.

    8. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish it were so. I work at a Silicon Valley fortune 500 company... Standard IT policy is to include a form with computer maintenance requests which has your password on it.

      Needless to say if I were to ever need that, I would change my password first. Of course, I would probably have bigger problems because I installed Linux over Windows anyway.

    9. Re:Every 30 days. by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You laugh, but I once advised a friend to write (most of) her passwords down on a slip of paper and carry it in her wallet.

      Any policy has to take into account the circumstances and concerns of the user into account. In this case she was an author who was being cyberstalked buy someone who'd figured out her easy-to-guess password. She changed the password to her site and he promptly guessed that one too.

      So my advice was this: generate a moderately tough password, say a ten digit random number, and write it down twice: once for her files, once to carry around in her wallet. Then add to that an easy-to-remember part, say the name of her best friend's cat, but don't write that part down, keep that in her head. This results in a password that looks like this: "491-265-4743Fluffy". I chose ten digits and formatted it that way because if it looks like a phone number pretty soon she won't have to carry the paper around. I reckon that this adds something like 32 bits of entropy to her weak but easy to remember password. Even if you know how the password is generated, it's not trivial to guess or break by brute force, and it's certainly not practical to guess for someone who doesn't have physical access to her wallet.

      Is it secure enough for the Morgan Stanley family jewels or the nuclear launch codes of the United States? No. But it's good enough for most practical purposes where you're not that concerned about an adversary who has physical access to you.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    10. Re:Every 30 days. by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      If you are really stressed out about password security, really the best bet is to go whole hog with an airgap networks. Basically networks running in parallel and never ever touching except by human inputs. An internal secure network where password access it not that important because an individual requires direct personal access to the internal network and data access logs, machine and user, are sufficient to control access. Then you quick and dirty external network, where machines carry no real secure data and can be readily rebuilt at the drop of a hat, basically all about internet communications. Any secure communications with external sources are again kept completely separate ie if the majority of users don't need access than it should not even touch the network the majority of users are on.

      Yes it takes more effort to maintain and data going from one network to another takes quite a bit of network security administrative effort, with that only ever occurring on network admins connections and manually copied, checked and transferred to the other network. Easy, fast and convenient will never be secure, specifically because it is just as easy, fast and convenient for those you don't want to have access, as for those who you want to have access. The best security road block is to force direct personal access to secured terminals via specific network gaps. Wireless is of course a do not touch for anything except external mobile comms that can be readily cleaned and rebuilt with only very limited data risk.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    11. Re:Every 30 days. by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

      The PCs my employer issues to its workers have "smart card" readers built in, but they (a) they require cards with contacts (which our standard badges don't have and (b) (according to the security dept) cards that are compatible with both the PCs and the door lock system are very expensive. As such, the company only issue those cards to the finance and HR depts (and the execs and their assistants).

      Of course, to prevent anyone in possession of one of these cards from being able to log in, passwords would still be needed. (Not that our security dept seems to care that anyone with a badge can get in the office (granted, a worker who looses their card will report the loss, but it might be hours (or days) before the loss is noticed))

      --
      Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
    12. Re:Every 30 days. by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      That is one of the xkcd comics that really bugs me. Yes, if you treat every character as an independent element and try to calculate it's complexity, those passwords look really complex. Unfortunately, most password crackers aren't brute force crackers that try every character combination. They try combinations of well known words, phrases, and number/symbol combinations. So, you're mathematically complex password is exactly what crackers are looking for.

      To be fair, as long as you're the only one in your company doing it, it's reasonably secure, as soon as it becomes company policy, all your passwords fall within regular cracking procedures, and are likely easier to crack.

    13. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do random words? Use a sentence. I do that for many of my passwords. You get upper and lower case letters, symbols, and maybe even numbers, and it's not hard to go past 20 characters. It's highly customizable for each user and much easier to remember.

      The problem with this is that there are still too many systems that have length caps that are too short. Not really many solutions for limits of 16, 10, or even 8 characters.

      I do the same thing. Takes a bit longer to type each time, but remembering them is much much easier, aside from character length or ones that require special symbols like %, ^, or &.

      In the next five years, I'd be happy if my bank accounts had the same length. Some are 4 and others 5 digits long at the ATM (once a week at most to once a year between uses). Never 100% sure which account is which, and I don't want to write them down obviously.

    14. Re:Every 30 days. by vux984 · · Score: 2

      Asking a user for their password is against corporate policy at all the Fortune 500 companies that I worked for in Silicon Valley. The correct procedure is to inform the user that their password will get reset to a temporary password (i.e., Password123), and, after setting up their new system, check on the box on the AD account for the user to change their password when logging in. Under no circumstances should an I.T. technician know a user's passwords. That's ground for immediate termination.

      Its my policy even at the nobody-ranked-them-in-fortune-magazine companies I work with.

      I don't know my users passwords and I don't want to know them.

      That said, the "solution" you suggest is unworkable for so many reasons it just not funny.

      Do you have any idea how many things break when a users password is marked expired/change on next login? Do you have any idea how many things typically get broken when you reset a users password on them? Especially when the user isn't bog-standard logs-into-a-workstation regularly, but still authenticates against AD for a variety of 3rd party services.

      My policy lately is to have the user login with *their* credentials without me resetting them, and then I'll remote in and do any additional setup that must be done.

      Its not quite as convenient, but it ensures I don't need to know their passwords, and it saves me the headache of things that break (even temporarily) due to me having reset it on them.

      Under no circumstances should an I.T. technician know a user's passwords. That's ground for immediate termination.

      Nice. So if the user writes their password on a sticky on their laptop and you see it they just they fire YOU? ;-

      Or do they at least fire the user too?

      What if that user is a CxO, P, or VP (because it usually is)?

      Welcome to IT ! :)

    15. Re:Every 30 days. by neonleonb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In that XKCD he doesn't treat characters independently. Instead, he assumes that each word provides 11 bits of entropy (i.e. assuming uniform draws from ~2000 words), giving a total of 44 bits. That's far less than the (26^20) you'd get if you treated the characters as independent random samples.

    16. Re:Every 30 days. by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are a few minor tweaks that significantly increase entropy will still not being hard to remember:

      1) Don't capitalize the first letter in a word used in a passphrase. Instead, capitalize something in the middle.

      2) When adding numbers, add somewhere in the middle of a word rather than between words.

      3) If security is really important, spell one longish word backwards before apply 1 and 2.

      4) Another trick I've used many times (as a touch typist) is to type words with your fingers slid over one key, left, right, or upleft/upright. Thus a simple, common word like "login" becomes ";phom", "kifub", "o9t8h", or "p0y9j" .

      Use of these tricks add tremendous amounts of entropy to otherwise crappy passwords while still being very easy to remember.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    17. Re:Every 30 days. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      My policy lately is to have the user login with *their* credentials without me resetting them, and then I'll remote in and do any additional setup that must be done.

      That works, if the user is around. Most times they aren't. Or sometimes they're uncooperative ("I just changed my password 89 days ago!"). If I don't have time to bark up the org chart because of a dead line, I'll do what I need to do. All the users are forewarned that this might happen via emails, fliers at their desks and verbal communications.

      So if the user writes their password on a sticky on their laptop and you see it they just they fire YOU? ;-

      I'm a contractor. So everyone suspects I'm going to roll up to the back door with a delivery truck and steal all the computers. Never mind that regular employees can do the same thing -- and sometimes do steal things -- because physical security is weak. Contractors are usually the first to get fired if anything goes wrong. Most of the time it's reminding users what the password policy is and ripping the paper with the password to shreds.

      Welcome to IT ! :)

      I've only been doing IT for 15+ years now. I did numerous password resets while replacing 3,000 PCs a few years ago. Only a few users ever got mad and management backed up my actions.

    18. Re:Every 30 days. by vux984 · · Score: 1

      That works, if the user is around. Most times they aren't.

      Like I said, I usually do it remotely.

      Or sometimes they're uncooperative

      Yeah... when that happens you just do what you have to do.

      I've just found that resetting someone's password is often a PITA for them... and in turn for me, and then I spend the next month getting follow up calls because some ipad or intranet app stopped working.

      And with employees that are literally almost never around, and never / rarely log into a windows dekstop -- setting their system to require a new password when they log in effectively breaks a lot of stuff until they find a desktop to log into.

    19. Re:Every 30 days. by l810c · · Score: 2

      There is a good way around that that I have used for years. Don't use the current date. Use M-1 and Y-1(that's not exactly how I do it, but similar).

      Also pick a couple of words and abbreviate them.

      If your favorite Ice Cream is Cookies and Cream, you might choose a monthly password like this
      Cok1113Crm#g - google password
      Cok1113Crm#e - espn password

      Easy to remember and always gets very secure score and a similar but not exact password across sites.

    20. Re:Every 30 days. by gizmo2199 · · Score: 1

      Also, if sysadmins would implement sha512 hashes with a 5,000 round PBKDF2, it would make brute-force dictionary attacks a lot harder to accomplish. Instead a lot of websites, even e-commerce sites, still use MD5.

      --
      This Sig does not Exist.
    21. Re:Every 30 days. by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      No, not really. That's the kind of wrong thinking that leaves us with our shitty overly complex passwords that change every x days out in plain sight on post-it notes.

      Yes, those are all common words. Yes, a cracker can have those words in a dictionary. But.. how many possible common words are there? That was a 4 word password, how many possible cominations of those 4 words are there?

      There are only 26 letters in the English alphabet. Other languages may vary a bit but most are close to that. Double that for case sensitivity. Add 10 digits and a few special characters. You are still no where near the number of common words.

    22. Re:Every 30 days. by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      "how many possible cominations[sic] of those 4 words are there?"

      I meant "how many possible combinations of 4 'normal' words are there?"

    23. Re:Every 30 days. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      There are a few minor tweaks that significantly increase entropy will still not being hard to remember:

      1) Don't capitalize the first letter in a word used in a passphrase. Instead, capitalize something in the middle.

      2) When adding numbers, add somewhere in the middle of a word rather than between words.

      3) If security is really important, spell one longish word backwards before apply 1 and 2.

      4) Another trick I've used many times (as a touch typist) is to type words with your fingers slid over one key, left, right, or upleft/upright. Thus a simple, common word like "login" becomes ";phom", "kifub", "o9t8h", or "p0y9j" .

      1: You have to remember which letter.
      2: You have to remember where it was inserted.
      3: You have to remember which word, and be good at sdrawkcab.
      4: You have to remember which way you displaced your hands. Also, john and crack both have rules for that.

      All in all, what you ensure is that the user forgets his password.

      And sometimes forgetting the password is an acceptable solution. If the mail server can be considered uncompromised and always up, and the application server can deliver through a direct hardcoded route, sending a one time password might be a good solution. But that are a couple of pretty big ifs.

    24. Re:Every 30 days. by CaptQuark · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All government agencies are transitioning to Smart Card based two-factor authentication. The Common Access Card (CAC) used by the military is one type of smart card that is supported by many other agencies. It eliminates the need for remembering passwords, can't be used if stolen, locks itself if the incorrect PIN is attempted, supports proximity-based readers like door locks, and contains certificates for encrypting email and digital signatures.

      With the number of government agencies purchasing these cards, the per card cost is coming down quickly.

    25. Re:Every 30 days. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Actually, you're not too far off about the launch codes. Nuclear launch codes are in large part, secured by physical security systems. The codes themselves aren't terribly long (for practical reasons), but to get to them requires going through a good deal of physical security, beginning with the armed guards at the gate and ending with a glorified safe (also for practical reasons). And in case you're wondering how I know any of this, well, I don't know any of it for certain, but it makes sense to rely primarily on the existing layers of security and just have something simple at the very core. After all, you don't want a retaliatory strike to take 30 minutes to initiate because the codes are each 200 characters long and require going through ten complicated authentication methods to reach.

      The 200-character password is only useful if you expect it to be stored in some online database in unsalted MD5. Otherwise, there are bigger points of failure, such as transmission over plaintext, plaintext storage, keyloggers, or TEMPEST-style timing attacks. After a certain point, increasing physical security is probably preferable to adding any more digital security. That is, someone coming in and imaging your HDD (or swiping the post-it, at that point it's about the same) is probably a bigger threat than someone brute-forcing through an online login page, and the most cost-effective way to secure the former method of attack are physical barriers.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    26. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I dont know where you get the idea that Fluffy is a cat. Everyone knows it's a three-headed dog.

    27. Re:Every 30 days. by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      And some of the smaller websites will just mail your password to you on request. Just had one like that last week. Unbelievable in this day and age.

      And another website I logged into last week, a frequent flyer program for a major airline, had a maximum of 6 numbers for the password. Not characters, numbers only! No idea how they store it, but something tells me they're probably not using MD5 and have never heard of salt.

    28. Re:Every 30 days. by N1AK · · Score: 2

      A password doesn't need to be overly complex to avoid brute force cracking, just sufficiently long. Most people are incapable of remember past 7 to 10 random character sequences. And any password system with limited character lengths is insufficient against brute force attacks.

      A secure password depends largely on what you're priorities are. Personally I wouldn't put brute force attacks too high on my concerns list. My workplace locks out accounts after 3 incorrect attempts. Personally I think one of the biggest priorities with passwords should be ensuring that, even if every password isn't incredibly secure, you don't use the same password in multiple locations.

      I'm probably more likely to have my password taken by a hack on a server than by someone brute forcing it. If I care enough about it then I'd rather have 2 factor protection (google authenticator for example) than a strong password. Beyond that I priotise having passwords I can remember/workout for every website/application which is unique rather than having fewer stronger passwords.

    29. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Is it secure enough for [..] the nuclear launch codes of the United States? No. "

      Indeed not, it was set to 00000000 so your suggestion would have been safer.

    30. Re:Every 30 days. by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. Thank you.

    31. Re:Every 30 days. by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      I even know people in IT with passwords like that. When setting up a new computer for you they'll ask for your username/password so they can log in and setup your profile, so they are well aware that people do that.

      Whoa... they're doing it wrong, and if I worked in that company I'd give the ultimatum of fix this policy or I walk -- actually, more like conclude the interview process all together so we're not wasting eachother's time ("But Raven Lord, jobs are so hard to come by!" yeah yeah yeah... different rant for a different thread that would amount to "Not a valid reason to wipe your ass with your personal integrity" with supporting ideas -- if I were more like Haselton, I'd probably type up a submission about it.). There is no reason for an admin to ever have to access an individual profile beyond initial setup. That's the employee's job, even with Windows. What's supposed to happen is when a computer is being set up, all the applications that the user needs is to be installed by the administrator/root account and the user account/profile is given permission to use these applications. Then the new computer is installed at the user's desk and the first time he logs into his new machine, his roving profile is downloaded to it and everything looks more or less just like it did on his old machine...with maybe a few app changes.

      If a new user account is created, the account is given a temp password and flagged for change on next login. Also, installing a software policy enforcing program along with the standard anti-virus/malware suites can make administration helpful by minimizing or eliminating the need for administrators to have to go in and fix crap the user did.

    32. Re:Every 30 days. by jimbobborg · · Score: 1

      And if you do manage to lock yourself out you have to head to one of the CAC issuing offices to get it reset. Learned that the hard way.

    33. Re:Every 30 days. by jbmartin6 · · Score: 2

      A long "password" can be achieved by using a sentence, which is typically easy to remember but also sufficiently complex. Not a jumble of words like the horse battery staple, but a real sentence. It is easy for people to use sentences that apply to their own lives but are not at all easily guessable. For instance "Fluffy eats too much bacon."
      One problem with this approach though is that many apps or sites don't allow spaces, or they have the counterproductive 'policy' that forces you to use a number, a special character, blah blah blah, but only allows some small number of characters. But it works great for modern OS passwords. So go ahead and set your policy to length only and advise users to make a sentence.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    34. Re:Every 30 days. by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      I gave the same advice when I worked with doctors who had to have two dozen different passwords (Medical applications at the time could not be bothered to implement AD integration). They just carried a little notebook around with the passwords in it. Sometimes advice like 'never write your password down' is counterproductive, since the alternative was they just used as simple a password as possible for everything.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    35. Re:Every 30 days. by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      4: You have to remember which way you displaced your hands. Also, john and crack both have rules for that.

      Rules/mutations/whatever in password crackers don't increase their chance of a hit if the base password isn't in their dictionary.

      Even so, the "slide" trick adds two bits of entropy to the password.

    36. Re:Every 30 days. by bwcbwc · · Score: 2

      Maybe, as long as the sentence isn't a quotation from anything online or exceeds 50 characters or so. Dictionary attacks use entire phrases now, but they still don't go beyond a character limit that's fairly low compared to entire sentences.

      Some additional password fuzzing techniques to consider.
      - Putting nums or special characters between syllables in words, not just between the words.
      - Using multiple specials/nums between each word.
      - Strange uses of spaces and punctuation.
      - There are 2 additional ways to encode alpha characters as numbers besides 1337-speak. Use alternate means.
      - use puns or homophones to make your phrase less likely to match a dictionary.

      As far as the OP, there are some things that your company can do to improve security without completely abandoning the passwords. They may find some of these more palatable:
      - Instead of sending new password direct to user, send an access code to the user's manager. User has to request the access code from the manager, then use the code to login to the site that gives them their temporary password. This has the additional advantage of bringing to manager's attention which employees are particularly bad at remembering their passwords, and who probably need more attention to assure they don't have any sticky note reminders on their desktop.
      - Rather than use full 2-factor authentication, just enable a standard password locker software to install on each employee's computer and give them a flash drive to host their password file. This is a lot cheaper than buying customized smart cards or key dongles, and is significantly more secure than what you have now, especially if they use the random PW generators that most lockers make available.

      --
      We are the 198 proof..
    37. Re:Every 30 days. by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      In a way, my card makes things even worse. I still have to change my Windows password every 2 months, but since I no longer enter it daily, it's a lot harder to remember.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    38. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would suggest to your security department that if the cost of card X + card Y card Z, they should just use a two card solution. It isn't any harder to have two cards on your lanyard instead of one.

      The other neat solution is RFID prox tokens, and your NFC enabled phone can even be the token. You could also have a bluetooth unlock from the cell phone, most people will report a stolen cell quicker than a prox card.

    39. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      proof yet again of the corollary that every slashdot article has at least one relevant xkcd

    40. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use quotations from movies, tv, or elsewhere and substitute symbols (that make reasonable sense) for words in that quotation. For example, one of the passwords I use is this:

      You !can expect to wield ^power.

      This is part of a quote from Monty Python and the Holy Grail - "You can't expect to wield supreme power..." - from the scene where King Arthur is explaining to Dennis why he is king (and Dennis is trying to explain why you can't base a system of government on farcical aquatic ceremonies).

      I have another password based on a different quote from a different source that is 38 characters long. Super easy to remember, not tough to type, and the only thing it lacks is digits.

    41. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Exactly this. It drives me crazy when I have taken the time to come up with an easily remembered passphrase that is over 30 characters long and then I get hit with "Your password must be 6 characters long and include at least one number" (this is the real requirement for the Minnesota Unemployment Insurance website). Makes me feel real secure when I have to fall back to a variation of a pet's name and the number 1.

    42. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice! I like the idea of moving your fingers out of the default typing positions.

    43. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My favorite part is having to change the password every 30 days.

      A LOT of people will use base password+date.

      I can't be bothered to do that. I just took the help-desk-supplied password and appended a "1" to the end. Every 30 days, I increment the number until I get to "9", then roll over to "0". Fortunately, we use Windoze, so the idiot admins (are there any other kinds of MS admins?) haven't figured out how to force more unique password.

      When setting up a new computer for you they'll ask for your username/password so they can log in and setup your profile

      When those [rare] happy days come, I change my password to two consecutive GUIDs (without spaces or hypens), e.g.: 0fa129a1b15f45cfa86802337a9d97cb49faed5685384b4483fb151d331646f5

      If they ask me to mail it to them, I say, "are you sure? Security told me to never email my password."

      And then they say, "well, you can just change it after."

      I reply, "Oh, I don't know. I better check with my manager to make sure it is okay."

      So then they say, "never mind, just tell it to me again."

      I know they're writing it down and I could bust them for that, but you can't play with your prey too much if you want them to keep coming back.

    44. Re:Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When setting up a new computer for you they'll ask for your username/password so they can log in and setup your profile, so they are well aware that people do that.

      Asking a user for their password is against corporate policy at all the Fortune 500 companies that I worked for in Silicon Valley.

      How many is that? 0? 3?

      Certainly it isn't 500.

      Asking a user for their password wasn't a problem at the Fortune 1 company I worked for a few years ago. If you knew which company that is/was, you'll know why.

    45. Re:Every 30 days. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I previously worked at eBay/PayPal, Fujitsu, Google, Intuit and Sony. Your Fortune 1 company -- Wal-Mart? -- doesn't have a good security policy.

    46. Re:Every 30 days. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      How many is that? 0? 3?

      There were 22 Fortune 500 companies in Silicon Valley in 2013. I worked at four of them.

    47. Re:Every 30 days. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      The government contractor I'm working for requires CAC to encrypt email and a separate eToken (USB dongle) to access network resources. Despite using these two devices, I still have to remember a half-dozen different passwords to do my job.

    48. Re:Every 30 days. by houghi · · Score: 1

      You laugh, but I once advised a friend to write (most of) her passwords down on a slip of paper and carry it in her wallet

      I once had to change my password every week for a project. I wrote it down.

      My father writes his pincodes down as part of a phonenumber. e.g. have it as "John Doe 1-212-555-1234" where John Doe is a real sounding name and the phonenumber looks real. The last 4 are the pincode. (Could be any of them in any order. Also will depend on the country. e.g. the real pincode here could be 3215)
      He has done that for number codes since at least 60 years.

      He uses some sort of Monoalphabetic encryption which uses only one word and is even simpler as VigenÃre cipher as he can do it without any paper. And no, it is not Caesar cipher or anything like it. It is based on one word. Not sure what it is. He explained it to me when I was a kid and I forgot most of it.

      This all from a time where he used (and still uses) paper agenda's and no access to anything electronic.

      I personaly have 5 passwords. Work, Bank, Personal machines, Unsafe Internet, Safe Internet. The issue is that I often need can't remember my login as often you can not select your own login.

      At one company I had 17 different logins with variations of my name, company or combination because the systems were handled by different companies. (Also had 3 digipasses.)

      One had such a 'secure' system that we had the process (including the 3 differnt logins and passwords that were send to us each month) printed out and hanging next to the dedicated PC for all to see.
      Yes, they were stupid enough not to give individual logins and/or digipasses, but insisten on a group password.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    49. Re:Every 30 days. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      One of my previous employers had that policy - change password every 90 days, and don't repeat the last 6 passwords. My way around it was basepassword1, basepassword2...basepassword9, basepassword1,...

    50. Re:Every 30 days. by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, the worst part is different systems having different requirements that sometimes precludes using the same password different places. Some mandate combinations of uppercase & lowercase, some toss in numbers, some special characters while some allow anything except special characters. I say - just toss out those rules. I've had to put together an elaborate password that is a combination of special, uppercase, lowercase and numeric, and I still have to change that in some cases where only the subsets are allowed

    51. Re: Every 30 days. by RandomSkratch · · Score: 1

      So I SHOULDN'T have named my hamster Kerberos?

    52. Re: Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The not wearing ID problem is solved by making it disciplinary, AND making allowing tailgating disciplinary too.

    53. Re:Every 30 days. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Honestly, memorizing vs put it in your wallet is about equally secure. People instinctively guard their wallet. If someone is willing to rob you to get your password from your wallet they are probably willing to just slap you around until you tell them your password. The guy with the launch codes will probably resist heroically but a typical office worker will not and should not.

      It's better to give up the password and call IT to get it changed ASAP.

    54. Re:Every 30 days. by hey! · · Score: 1

      I agree that the bulk of the benefit of this approach comes from choosing hard passwords that are written down. But a lot of people have internalized the "Never write your password down" thing, so I opt to recommend a kind of poor man's two factor authentication as an approach people can accept.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    55. Re:Every 30 days. by leslie.satenstein · · Score: 1

      For a good password, use your own phrase in place of "hello there" echo "hello there" | sha1sum 55e82e1eb131597ce6ef77ff775b2c2e5f4d6b45

    56. Re:Every 30 days. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      I use sentences of my own creation. In the case of mandatory password changes, I will sometimes use some piece of trivia. For example, I might use the counties of a state. It reduces the entropy somewhat, especially if someone finds out what the reference is, but it allows me some room to work and embeds a new bit of trivia into my head.

      I do use password managers (a couple of them, actually), and I know there are some enterprise password managers out there. There's a danger to stand-alone managers, but a well-managed enterprise should have all of the core passwords securely stored somewhere.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    57. Re:Every 30 days. by jon3k · · Score: 1

      or just use keepass. its free and you only have to remember one password. use dropbox to sync your keepass database to all your devices. i even have keepass on my phone. i actually use owncloud but have used dropbox previously and it works fine.

  14. Write it down by Keruo · · Score: 2

    I would encourage users to write down their password on a piece of paper.
    That paper should contain only the password, no hint to what it belongs to.
    The paper will then be stored inside the persons wallet, and looked at when neccessary, but not taken out.
    If that person manages to loose their wallet, they have bigger problems than the company password.

    --
    There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
    1. Re:Write it down by slapout · · Score: 1

      They're also more likely to notice that their wallet is missing than their post it note with the password stuck to the desk.

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  15. good security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not sure if it is available outside of Citrix, but that system uses 3 factor authentication, which is username, password, and an 8 digit numeric password follwed by a 6 digit RSA SecureID token that is supplied by a hardware dongle each employee has. Since it's broken into segments, there is less for the employee to remember and even having all the passwords without the RSA token the system cannot be accessed.

    1. Re:good security by mlts · · Score: 1

      RSA SecurID is one of the standard 2FA methods that can be used, and it works well without needing a special dialog on the screen (which may be needed for some challenge/response systems.) It has been around for a long time.

      Of course, there is one major problem: The cost. The keyfobs are not cheap. The seeds which are required for apps on smartphones are also not cheap. The RSA Authentication Manager servers are not cheap, and you need multiples of these at the core office and branches.

      Then there is the concern about hacking. RSA uses their own algorithm to get the authentication server and the keyfob to work. Is it as secure as the open source Google Authenticator? Who knows.

      RSA SecurID on the edges, either via VPN, Citrix, or both? Yes, this is a wise thing to do. RSA for every AD access? The return on security investment would be minimal compared to just setting a wise password policy [1].

      [1]: There were /. articles about using 16 character passwords and having them valid for 6-12 months which gave more security than 8-10 character PWs changed monthly. xkcd.com/936 explains it better.

    2. Re:good security by sexconker · · Score: 1

      This is not three-factor authentication. Username is not a factor because it is not considered secret.

      A username is not a secret piece of information.
      A stored hash is not a secret piece of information.
      A password is a secret piece of information.
      A salt is not a secret piece of information.
      An RSA clock's seed is a secret piece of information, but the user doesn't know it, and it lies exposed on the validating server.

      The only thing RSA clocks prevent is remote, delayed attacks. An attacker acting at the same time a user is doing shit will be able to sniff/MITM and use the output of the RSA clock just as the user would. Note that this attacker can be fully automated software that is always awake and watching the compromised boxes.

      Actual two-factor security would be you going somewhere, someone verifying that you look like you and are behaving normally, and the system verifying your password/pin/etc.

  16. I want something simpler. by ledow · · Score: 1

    I work in schools.

    I'd be interested in any cheap, Windows-logon compatible system that I can supply my own RFID reader hardware for.

    RFID readers are stupid-cheap. Nobody's going to go to the effort of copying an RFID tag just to get on a system as a child user. And I can buy tags for about 10p each.

    Every logon system I see is stupendously priced (either per reader, per card, or per seat software licence) or doesn't work on Windows logon. Those are useless to me.

    I've been looking since the XP GINA days, still haven't found anything vaguely suitable and in a school's price-range.

    (Note: School in the UK refers to education up to age 18, in my particular case education up to age 13).

    1. Re:I want something simpler. by jader3rd · · Score: 1

      Nobody's going to go to the effort of copying an RFID tag just to get on a system as a child user.

      Until somebody does.

    2. Re:I want something simpler. by w_dragon · · Score: 1

      You know that a smartphone with NFC can generally duplicate a RFID token, right?

    3. Re:I want something simpler. by ledow · · Score: 1

      No worse than the children already do - shoulder-surfing passwords, jumping on their friends machine, etc.

      All things that can see their account suspended. All things that we deal with already. We're not talking high-end security for children's accounts here. It's not uncommon for early years to have an account with a password like "cat" or "dog". Giving them an RFID tag is nothing more than more convenient than waiting for a class of 4-year-olds to type "cat".

  17. New easy to remember password. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gurps_npc knows nothing about passwords!1!

    Now if you have a problem with your software not accepting that pass, you do not have a password complexity problem, you have a software problem ("Our software requires all passwords to be all uppercase letters and no more than 8 characters!").

    If your users cannot remember that pass. You need better password training or to replace defective users. If mgmt doesn't buy in, the ship is already lost.

    Now if you just want to move to 2 factor because it seems cool, well that is another discussion.

  18. Smart Cards by MagickalMyst · · Score: 2

    I used to work for an oil company that used smart cards to login to a PC.

    Sure, you still need a PIN but you also need the card. It's not foolproof but it is somewhat more secure.

    The real challenge would probably be convincing your company to purchase new hardware and update their security policy.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
    1. Re:Smart Cards by Eristone · · Score: 1

      Chevron's SmartBadge system was kind of nice - it was just a pain when you needed to log into more than one machine at a time...

  19. My employer stores CLEARTEXT passwords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do I stop that? They keep refusing.

    1. Re:My employer stores CLEARTEXT passwords by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Propose a solution that lets them recover employee data after they leave the company.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:My employer stores CLEARTEXT passwords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless they're encrypting everything with those passwords, there's no problem. The data's all there, the only thing stopping you logging in is Active Directory (or whatever). A network admin can just forcibly reset any user's password.

  20. Douchbags by sinrakin · · Score: 2

    For the same reason the TSA acts the way they do. If you take security to insane extremes such that everyone is always massively inconvenienced, you can never be blamed for not doing enough, no matter what happens. And there's an implicit assumption that if you've moved onto crazy extreme measures, you must have already exhausted all the less extreme measures.

  21. You're fighting a few fronts here by Vokkyt · · Score: 1

    You have a few challenges ahead of you; political ones, technical ones, and fiscal ones.

    Are you just hoping to be the initial voice of inspiration and get everyone behind you? Or are you ready to be the advocate for the two factor auth you're proposing? Unless you've done your research and you know a lot of others in your department are on board with this proposal already, your proposal is going ground itself without much more than a candle flicker.

    People tend to be really resilient to change, even really bright tech folk. "Good enough" is the motto that most people live by, so you're going to have to make a really enticing argument or get a lot of support across the board before even presenting this. Check with the necessary Systems folk; do they have ideas or wants or problems with a Two-Factor auth for users? Do the math for your accounts; are you saving enough money that it will make someone look good? Check with your Help Desk/Ticketing software; are password resets really enough of a problem that they're impacting people's work flow?

    I promise you that most folks in a position to make a decision like this aren't staying up at night wishfully hoping that someone suggests TFA for the company, and few non-tech people in the company are even going to know what the hell you're talking about.

    You're going to need to be prepared to really explain your idea and show that it already has support, else they're just gonna look at you like you suggested catapulting the ring into Mordor.

  22. Complexity is a red herring by robbo · · Score: 2

    Complexity matters mainly if your attacker gains offline access to your hashes. Far and away the main source of password compromise is non-uniqueness (using the same password elsewhere). This is actually the main benefit of forcing a periodic password change. Graphical and gesture passwords are horribly insecure from shoulder surfers.
    If you can, support as many factors as possible. Multiple factors gives your users flexibility- they may not always be able to receive an SMS or have a card reader handy. TPM-based virtual smart cards are super handy for remote auth from a domain-joined device- no cards or readers required.

    --
    So long, and thanks for all the Phish
  23. Duo Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check it out...
    https://www.duosecurity.com/

  24. Hardware password storage? by OneSizeFitsNoone · · Score: 1

    What about using an openhardware password storage device like Mooltipass? http://hackaday.io/project/86-... Mooltipass is composed of one main device and a smartcard. On the device are stored your AES-256 encrypted passwords. The smartcard is a read protected EEPROM that needs a PIN code to unlock its contents (AES-256 key + a few websites credentials). As with your credit card, too many tries will permanently lock the smart card. The mooltipass main components are: a smart card connector, an Arduino compatible microcontroller, a FLASH memory, an OLED screen and its touchscreen panel. The OLED screen provides good contrast and good visibility. Unfortunatley this project is about to fail it's Indiegogo crowdfunding campaign.

  25. Safenet by ideadman · · Score: 1

    Our company has been using Safenet for the last year or so since we implemented 2FA for VPN and it has gone quite well. Being software based that can be loaded on laptops or smartphones makes it convenient and we don't have to worry about the tokens being lost and having to get a replacement out causing downtime. The downside is it can be locked out requiring some back and forth to unlock the token.

  26. I've long since given up by sinrakin · · Score: 2

    My routine way of logging onto anything that I hit less than once a week is to automatically click on the "I forgot my password" button and reset via email without even attempting to remember it. That basically makes all passwords equivalent to my gmail password, but since anyone with the gmail could do that any time they wanted it's no loss of security. It's a little inconvenient, but not as inconvenient as trying to remember 100 unique passwords.

    1. Re:I've long since given up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not alone!

      (captcha indolent)

  27. Myris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read about Iris scanning this morning on Gizmodo using a small mouselouke device called Myris. $240 and you can use super complex passwords and never have to remember (or change) them as they are encrypted and accessible only by the users eyes, which can't be accidentally lost, stolen or left at home.
    http://recode.net/2014/12/02/review-myris-scans-your-eyes-to-log-you-in-to-pcs-sites/

  28. If you're asking here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...maybe you're not the right person to be running with this.

    Security is hard. The right tools used incorrectly can be worse than the wrong ones. If you're not sufficiently confident you know how to do this off that you're asking strangers for advice, or you don't know how to make the case convincingly, maybe it's a sign.

    "Some guy on slashdot said this was the best tool" is not the way to choose a security tool.

  29. Passphrase's if they don't go two factor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Indiana University switched to passphrases years ago. No cryptic symbols, numbers, translations, etc. Must be at least 4 words of 4 characters or more. A word is separated by a space or underscore. Easy to remember but at least 20 characters long. "Denzel likes silver haired ladies" for those Brickleberry fans. VERY secure and VERY easy for each user to remember.

  30. First step: what are you trying to secure by nine-times · · Score: 1

    The first step in trying to figure this out is to figure out what systems and services you're trying to secure. Are you trying to secure a web application? A specific file server? Are you trying to make it so people don't have to remember passwords for Dropbox? Are you trying to include your phone system, physical security to your systems, and the network AD login? Make a list of everything you're trying to secure, and then figure out what alternatives those systems support. Then cross-reference all those different systems to see what sign-on technologies and services support all of them (or the most, or the most important systems).

    Maybe you don't want to go about it quite that way, but the point is, you need to know your requirements before you try to select a solution. Your biggest problem is going to be finding a single product/service that supports replacing all of your passwords, since there isn't really a universally-supported standard replacement for passwords. One of the reasons passwords have been so successful and stuck around for so long is, you don't need to support any particular hardware or software. It's just text entry.

    So if you really want to pursue this, figure out what systems you want to secure, and then figure out what alternative methods support and are supported by those systems. I really wish that, instead of having 50 different companies trying to come up with their own clever little app with pretty animations to provide multi-factor authentication, there were a concerted effort to develop a set of standards that various developers could build from.

  31. hey, that's a damn good password! by swschrad · · Score: 1

    changing them all now... Post-1t.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  32. Oblig. Xkcd by jvaigl · · Score: 1

    I can't believe I'm the first to remind everyone of this: http://xkcd.com/936

    1. Re:Oblig. Xkcd by robbo · · Score: 1

      This got a lot of publicity but it doesn't really add all that much security. Supposing you choose 4 words from a dictionary of 200k (roughly the order of magnitude of the OED), you arrive at about 70 bits of entropy. Conversely, choosing a 10-character password from a 62 letter alphabet (a-zA-Z0-9) yields 59 bits of entropy- the difference is only a factor of 1024. Attackers aren't so dumb as to just try choosing random characters- they have very good priors on how common any particular character sequence is in the typical password and will mix and match entire words, with or without leetspeak substitutions, etc.

      Of course no matter how rigorous your policy, it all goes out the window once your users type the same password into some other random site.

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    2. Re:Oblig. Xkcd by sarkeizen · · Score: 1

      "This got a lot of publicity but it doesn't really add all that much security"

      When you don't have a clause starting with "relative to" and/or "given that" this always reads like a sentence fragment. Increasing resistance to certain attacks 1000x may well be worth it in a number of circumstances.

      Not to mention you appear to misunderstand the point the cartoon is making. People need to remember passwords. People can remember four entirely random common words but are unlikely to remember ten entirely random characters. Your points about "good priors" is correct but that's why XKCD only rates the 10 character password with 22 bits of entropy instead of 59 (or more since it uses punctuation). However since the WORDS are random - there are no priors.

      Even choosing four random words from the vocabulary of an eight year old gives you about 53 bits of entropy. Outperforming the entropy of the an entirely random 8 character password (52 bits - using a 62 character alphabet and 30 non-alphabetic symbols).

      Passphrases provide a higher amount of memorable entropy.

    3. Re:Oblig. Xkcd by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      I've worked in places that send you a message that you can't use obscenities in your password if you try. Ironic, because of course that makes them slightly easier to crack.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  33. Alternately by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    Write each new password on a separate post-it and keep them all posted around your desk. Let an intruder guess which one (if any) is the correct one! It will provide minutes of entertainment! MINUTES!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Alternately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only agree if the desk is also equipped with a harpoon launcher/taser. If the intruder submits 2 incorrect passwords they get it, full frontal!

  34. Smartcards by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

    Its the solution that's been touted for decades to the 'single sign on' solution. It does work - I know police forces and similar that use them without fuss.

    There are plenty around, and sure you have to remember a pin, but its usually way less complicated than remembering a huge long password, plus its the start of a single-signon solution that no-one can argue against once you're using them.

    If you use Windows, Microsoft has a lot of resources about smart card login

    1. Re:Smartcards by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      We are in the middle of removing smartcards from all our systems, the reality is in the world of tablets, smartphones and workers becoming more mobile smartcards are becoming one of the worst options as you have to make so many exceptions for where you don't have to use it that you may as well not have bothered with them in the first place.

  35. Writing down passwords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Writing them down is MUCH better than garbage passwords in the vast majority of scenarios.

    Remote threats are far more prevalent than insider threats.

  36. Corporate Liability Insurance, etc. by Bookwyrm · · Score: 1

    With regards to the actual posted question, you should find out if the company has any sort of insurance policy relating to data/security breaches that might be dictating things like the password policy. If the company has insurance to cover problems from insurance company X, and insurance company X is saying "You must do passwords, and like this, or else no insurance!", then you have a monumental task ahead of you because you have to convince your workplace to address the insurance policy/company - as well as an internal political/technical/budgetary issues.

    Beyond that, the field of the business was not specified. It is possible that, depending on the country, industry, business contracts, and local regulations, there might be some specific clause dictating this corporate policy. (There can be no end to the insanity when you have a situation where, in order to do business with government and/or company Y, your own business must get certified to follow practices according to standard Z, be audited, etc.) If something like a password policy change requires a (re)audit of to verify your company's power level is still over ISO 9000, or Sigma Mane Six or whatever, well... good luck.

  37. public key ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    best thing since sliced bread

  38. Built the Business Case by dave562 · · Score: 1

    What is the risk of continuing to use passwords?

    What is the cost to the business if the risk of continuing to use passwords is realized?

    What is the cost of implementing an alternate system? Be sure to include the costs in training, process re-engineering, systems re-engineering, etc.

    What value, if any, is generated by replacing passwords?

    Unless the money you are going to spend is either going to generate more money for the business than the dozens of other projects that are competing for resources, you practically have zero hope of your change being embraced.

    While some organizations are risk adverse to the point where they will act on them, more often than not unless you or your direct supervisor are liable for mitigating the risk, you are doing your career a disservice by raising the risk.

  39. Ahh fuck, the ole "it's too hard" line again... by s.petry · · Score: 1

    No, it's not too hard. I'm really sorry that you can't figure out how to train users on how to use strong passwords, but this is not an overly complex thing to do. It does take persistent training because nobody walking into the company will have received such training but passwords are not "bad" or "too hard".

    14 years ago I implemented a full Unix based LDAP system enforcing complex passwords with aging, history, and controls on admins that could change passwords without being "Directory Admin". I have since set up and run this system at numerous other companies. Linux used to suck a bit at it's PAM LDAP configurations, but today it's not so bad.

    Around the same time, I developed some methods for users to generate "STRONG" passwords with reasonable lengths. I still teach these today, and amazingly we use passwords very effectively. No, you don't pay me so can't have my methods. I'm telling you it's possible if you actually stop and do the work.

    2FA is still going to require a password for any reasonable system. If you go with the average 4 digit pin shame on you, but many people seem to believe this is protection somehow and better than a strong password.

    Certainly I'm not against 2FA, nor even 3FA and locks on doors. I'm against it for the common user because it does not save anything and adds a huge amount of overhead and work to reissue all the devices to users constantly. If you are in a small shop, maybe not a big deal but in a company of reasonable size it's a full time job just dealing with the Token/Badge/Whatever you have for the 2nd factor.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  40. Soft tokens... by GrpA · · Score: 1

    Verisign VIP is one ( commercial ) system that uses soft tokens, and the same token works on your ebay and paypal and other accounts, making it useful to users outside of work - since they start to introduce the same security to their outside-of-work use - Soft tokens are free and work on phones and PCs, hard tokens can be ordered ( they even have credit cards with the hardware token built in, and can print name badges with them ) -

    Generally, it's a pretty good system - you can download and try it too -

    GrpA

    --
    Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
    1. Re:Soft tokens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      telesign is a company offering a variety of authentication methods that may also be worth looking into.

    2. Re:Soft tokens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VeriSign works but there aint no way in hell it is cost effective. They rape you for everything, When we evaluated them they were even charging for soft tokens for fucks sake.

  41. Bring up this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring up you work for retarded company and the STFU and stop posting dumb shit to /.

  42. one word... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Biometrics!

  43. LaunchKey by jchysk · · Score: 1

    LaunchKey is capable of removing the need for passwords entirely in your system, so if that's a goal then it's a great solution. It's BYOD so the cost is low or free depending on implementation while simplifying the user experience and greatly increasing security. As far as points to bring up: Removal of passwords relieves the company of a liability of holding onto hacker bait and makes it much more difficult to impersonate another user using their credentials. Dealing with people forgetting passwords and resets can be surprisingly costly and there are alternatives that are easier to use where that will never be a problem.

  44. Tokens will be lost. Frequently. Daily. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    if you're giving your users a token, get the thing jabbed inside their hand so they don't lose it.

  45. Passwords are useless. by pigoon · · Score: 1

    Retinal scan and voice confirmation.

  46. What is your problem? No, really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're trying to tout a preferred solution for something that "obviously" needs fixing. But what are you trying to protect against, and how does that protection fit in the general workflow?

    In that sense the current solution is erroneous because it tries to be "secure" but does so in a way that is contraproductive and unsafe.

    Your new solution, though, risks making similar (but shiny! new!) errors because you're starting with what's popular. This is a common error with techie people, and leads to high-tech hollywood stupid stuff like biometrics (usable as unreliably-read usernames but not passwords) and the hot new thing with another crowd, "2FA" (endless fun when people forget or misplace the fob, or have it stolen, or whatnot).

    So I say, go back to the top of this post and work out a threat model. Also work out how to be friendly to the various workflows in the company (walk around! look how people work in the various departments), and fit your proposed solution to that. Maybe a SSO with a long-ish password is a better idea; one that doesn't need replacing so often and that only needs typing a few times a day (coming in, like after lunch). Maybe a (contact!) chip card is a better idea; combine it with rfid to open doors in the same card and people won't forget it when walking away. Of course, you still need to work out how to do recovery from loss and theft and such. But start with the problem and work out a (few) solution(s) from there.

    You need to do the working-out thing anyway, as evidenced by a company policy to share passwords. That should not be needed, so there is a clear need for better account access management anyway. And, while at it, revoking access on leaving, that sort of thing. But again: Don't start with a solution to throw at the problem. Start with dissecting the problem, which is that there is a need for reasonably secure access control well-fitted to the workflows in the company, as evidenced by the obvious failures. Don't be fooled these are all possible failures. If you get it wrong you create new failure modes. So thread carefully.

  47. exposure? Re:Consider Your User Base by Fubari · · Score: 1

    What is the exposure?
    If your company was ever hacked, what would the consequences be?
    If the consequences could be serious, follow the advice of educating your decision makers as brilliantly outlined by Captain D, above.
    Otherwise, what difference does it make if your company's machines and network(s) were actually compromised?
    I mean, what difference will a few more zombies in some bot-net actually make?

  48. office politics by Tom · · Score: 1

    First understand your position in the company and whose turf you're going to piss on if you make a move like that. You don't want your efforts to fail because you rubbed some manager the wrong way and he sabotages everything just because he can.

    Secondly, make sure your system is really better in all regards, especially the failure cases. People leaving the company or getting ill for a long time? Password sharing (no matter what your policy says, people are doing it, especially bosses and secretaries)? Password recovery?

    Third, make sure of user acceptance. People don't like change, and if the new system is not considerably more easy to use than the old one, you will face resistance.

    Fourth, pack all of that research into a presentation and make your case. Good luck, you'll need it.

    From my experience, #1 is the most important. Also take into account decision factors you may not know about. I've had a real-world experience where we (the security department) wanted to introduce an identity management system and were totally stonewalled. Three months later the company was sold - management already knew it would happen and they didn't want to commit to anything major or expensive just before the sale.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  49. Just use a password manager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KeePass. 'nuff said.

  50. I use LaunchKey for bitcoin auth and love it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a huge fan of this topic! We have integrated LaunchKey as a multi-factor authentication option on our bitcoin exchange, Coinsetter (I'm the founder). I use it everyday and have to admit that I am obsessed with their product.

    I don't know where to begin, but let's start with the fact that you can swipe/fingerprint scan instead of typing in an RSA token. It offers the same level of security as other options I've seen but is not at all annoying to use. Can't say the same for Authy or Google Auth. Anyway... I have been using LaunchKey for months and highly recommend integrating them.

  51. mnemonics by Karmashock · · Score: 2

    Very long passwords are very easy to remember if you use mnemonics.

    For example:

    412a7YaoFbfotCanNciladthptaMace

    Completely impossible to remember that password right? Wrong:

    ""Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.""

    You just have a set of rules for turning text into a password.

    In this case, all numbers are written as numbers and all words are lower case except nouns which are capitalized.

    Substitute that quote for any other and you can generate another very long password that is impossible to forget. You can even write the quote down prominently and no one is going to break into your system unless they know the system by which the quote is turned into a password. The system I cited above is very very simple but you can use a much more complicated one.

    The system usually should not change. You can keep that static. The quotes or text strings should change every so often. And when you do, you can put a sticky note on your computer with the quote right there. No one will break in.

    You can make the password as long or as short as you like.

    The downside is that the decoding process does take a moment. But you will not forget the password.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:mnemonics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      score = 20
      dozen = 12

      That is all.

  52. Starting with a false premise by laughingskeptic · · Score: 1

    "Any password policy sufficiently complex to be secure is too complex to remember" is not a universally true statement. https://www.schneier.com/blog/...

  53. Look over at documents under www.gce.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have a look at some of the documents (not the main page which is about a VMS security system). Some of those have a number of useful ideas about ways to authenticate safely. The gadgets mentioned can be a few bux each but will give much safer schemes than passwords.
    I would suggest that it won't HURT to have passwords, as long as you do something besides. Just don't let the passwords be much more than saying a username. That is, treat them as part of the identifier, not part of the authenticator.

  54. Smart cards by cyberspittle · · Score: 1

    with smart cards, they can be used for building, room access, log into system, and digitally sign emails. Seems stupid not use them. Wonder if it would have helped Sony?

  55. It can be done right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Protect against guessing attacks with a minimum 12 character length and a lockout after 10 failures. The lockout eliminates the need for symbols and numbers and such, so people can make passwords that they can remember.

    Protect against long-term guessing attacks by requiring a password change once a year.

    Protect against theft of the password file by hashing and salting the passwords.

    We are kidding ourselves when we say that requiring special characters makes our passwords more secure.

    1. Re:It can be done right. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      It's a shame that an AC had to post the most correct answer to security that I have seen in this thread. When I implement new systems, logins within one second of each other are not allowed. Three unsuccessful attempts leads to a locked account. Cracking even something as small as an 8 digit password would take millions of years. All passwords are sha-512 hashed and salted. Changing passwords every XX days is a surefire sign that the person in charge of policy never took a statistics class.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  56. Job security vs System security by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    I've found that there's a sweet spot to balancing system security and job security: recommend better practices than currently in place without becoming adamant about it.

    If you get the attention of a caring boss, you'll get your implementations, so make sure it's really a good idea and will work well before recommending it. But, more importantly, if they decide not to do it, then you are basically off the hook for responsibility for *any* breaches that occur afterwards. "I recommended a two-factor authentication to prevent data breaches over two years ago, and every quarterly IT review ever since!"

    What's odd for me as a developer is how many times I've talked to a tech guy who really "needs" us to add security feature X in our software, and we send over the information to turn it on after we write it, and they *still don't do it* even after they paid for the modification.

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:Job security vs System security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It means they got audited and needed to be able to tell the auditors, yep, we have X for security, but when X takes 30 seconds longer, off it goes. My company just went through such a process, and of the 5 security measures we just _had_ to have installed ASAP for the audit, 3 were left incomplete, and the 2 that did get finished do nothing without the other 3. And the one I recommended that would actually save time, make 3 of the 5 items redundant, is open source, is free and is industry standard? Low priority since the auditors didn't understand how it added the security they were wanting.

      The process they wanted secured was how can we make sure that what is deployed to production is what was approved to go there. The auditors wanted every step to require a password so that only authorized people could do it at the right time. The glaring hole they didn't look at was confirming the code deployed matched what was in the repository. As long as the deployment is done by a human who has access to modify the filesystem the packaged code is on before deployment, you have no way to verify that they didn't slip in something malicious.

      But as long as we could say we've done items 1 and 2, and 3, 4 and 5 are being added, they went on their merry way and left us alone for a year.

      verification: pacified.

  57. XKCD already covered this by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    XKCD already did a better job on just this issue.

              http://xkcd.com/936/

    1. Re:XKCD already covered this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A million times, this. Don't force me to relive the 90's and memorise some bunk mix of 7 random characters. Let me use a sentence, with any GD characters I wish, and be done with it.

  58. Can I ask the obvious question? by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    What is it that you are safe-guarding? I'd bet that it's not something vital enough that it needs anything more than a normal password, but if it is, stop keeping in a place where it's so easily accessible with the password. Door locks are still the safest devices around, and it's not because they can't be picked, it's because they need to be picked -- in person.

    That big importal vital data store? Air-gapped, in one room, with an attendant, and a lock on the door will do better than any 2-factor authentication system -- because it's got many more factors, including the biggest one: presence of person.

    You aren't going to blend convenience and security and wind up with anything more convenient or more secure than a password. I'd recon that's why we have passwords.

    1. Re:Can I ask the obvious question? by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Some tv show (agents of shield? can't remember) did something like that last year; the heroes couldn't hack into the bad guys' data warehouse so they sent a team in to the building, who busted in through the door and discovered..... that it was all kept on paper files in filing cabinets.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  59. 2-factor by loxosceles · · Score: 2

    FIDO alliance 2-factor hardware tokens, like YubiKey Neo.

    Until browsers roll out FIDO protocol support, a mobile app with normal OATH TOTP 2-factor (implementations include Authy, Duo Mobile, Google Authenticator, etc) is the way to go. And use a password manager for the 1st factor. When support gets baked in, the FIDO serviceclienthardware token protocol will dramatically improve usability of the 2nd factor.

  60. 8 character password is not too complex by iamacat · · Score: 1

    Employees get paid thousands of dollars every month, right? For that much, they can remember 8 characters of which one needs to be changed once in a while. If worst comes to worst, write down 4 that you change and remember 4 that you don't. That's kind of like two factor authentication - a post-it that you have and 4 characters that you know. Simpler passwords are unfortunately very vulnerable to dictionary attacks that consider what people most frequently used.

    There is obviously room for improvement. A USB device in addition to a password is better than a password alone. But the premise that current situation is horrible may be flawed. If you are saying there is a master 6 character password that encrypts users' 8 character ones, then yes there is a problem.

  61. That's 2 factor, what you know, what you have by raymorris · · Score: 1

    That's two factor authentication, what you know and what you have.

    You said:
        password, and an 8 digit numeric password

    That's precisely the same as saying:
    All passwords end in 8 numeric digits.

    So that's one factor, the password.

    User names aren't secret, their NAMES. Knowing your name is not a security factor. Even if they WERE secret, you could equally well describe that as:
    All passwords follow the form "name:letters:digits"

    Knowing the string is one factor. Having the token is the second factor.

  62. FreeIPA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FreeIPA now supports OTP out of the box: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Releases/4.0.0

    This includes full support for Kerberos, so you get OTP plus SSO!

  63. A thousand times more secure and can be remembered by raymorris · · Score: 1

    According to your math, passphrases are a thousand times more secure and, unlike 10 random characters, users can remember their passphrase. Sounds like a win to me.

  64. Are you crazy?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, are you insane? Are you in charge of security at your company? If not, you can make a few comments to 1 level up, and that's where it *must* stop. Only bring it up once. Don't repeat. Sony likely had people telling them about security. If you read the Fusion web site, there is an administrator who worked IT over at Sony Pictures. His take: Sony Pictures ran the whole outfit like a large small-office. Several executives were extremely high maintenance who insisted that security was for other people. Also, there were several well known attack vectors that could be easily used to break Sony's sites. All this after Sony tried to infect customers computers with rootkits, remove after-market functionality of products consumers already purchased (with the functionality as a selling feature). So unless you are completely prepared to fall on your sword when anything bad happens, keep your mouth shut.

  65. Passwords are so... quaint. by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

    'Authorised devices' (with a certificate/token authentication), with a -backup- password or other method. Every device has its own MAC address, why not take advantage of that? Of course, that doesn't eliminate -stealing- the device... but at least you can't do that from a distance ; ).

    --

    No, no sig. Really.

    ThePromenader
  66. Says who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Any password policy sufficiently complex to be secure is too complex to remember so people write them down."

    I just love it when someone states their personal belief as something that is an absolute truth.

  67. Excellent vendor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    use SMSPasscode

  68. Obligatory XCKD by Afty0r · · Score: 1
  69. really? by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    And you don't think the other methods won't have the same problems? you don't think you will see printed images on monitors for the graphical 'passwords'? also with 2 factor, how many people will loose their account for the token.. (yes 2 factor is slightly more secure ofcourse, but it certainly isn't as safe/monkeyproof as some people seem to think)

  70. Do as Bruce Schneier has suggested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Keep your passwords with the other important pieces of paper you carry around daily: in your wallet

  71. Use sentences + all character by sylivin · · Score: 1

    The best typed password system I've seen so far uses all characters and encourages sentences. A standard password would be something like: "What? Stop looking at my damn password!"

    It is easier for the human mind to think in terms of typical language useage. Sure, that password could be shortened to: W?Sl@mdp! but you get a much longer and easier to remember password by letting them type it in plain English. Get away from the 6-12 character passwords permanently and go to sentences.

  72. For a modicum of security by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Deploy two factor authentication. Now if you're dealing with the Unix/Linux world I recommend setting it up so a min of 12 characters - and explain how to compose passwords. But better yet - ssh keys with passphrase. That's much better.

  73. Lastpass by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1

    I use Lastpass. I get it to auto-generate random 16+ character passwords with a mix of alpha, numeric, upper / lower and special chars. The passwords are totally impossible to remember. Each password is totally unique to the site. I Then let it log me into everything after I give it my very long, easy to remember pass-phrase.

    XKCD: https://xkcd.com/936/

    --
    All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
  74. Every 30 days. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My favorite part is having to change the password every 30 days.

    I agree. Passwords that have to be changed regularly AT ALL is a security risk. People can remember long complex passwords - if they don't have to change them. If they change yearly or every three months - they revert to very simple passwords after 3-4 changes. Or some sort of timestamp system that add NO security. If the last password was long_complex_password-november, guess what it is for december . . .

  75. Why STOP using password? Add the others. by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

    I've yet to understand this mentality of stopping the use of passwords.

    I understand all the flaws, but here's the question.

    If improving security is the goal, why not ADD to the security process.

    Add a token generator (like the RSA keys most work places have for VPN)
    Add fingerprint/iris scan (for convenience)

    People are already used to passwords. As long as the second authentication method is easy and convenient, they will accept it.

  76. Fun times quantifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why security will suck for the foreseeable future: it's easier to quantify definite costs than ambiguous potential losses, and the first person to set up an insecure system is rarely asked to justify its cost.

  77. Seems obvious to me that by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    if you have a system that lets IT people reset your password on the basis that you know the last 4 digits of your SS number and the month and year of your hire, you might as well use the last 4 digits of your SS number and the month and year of your hire as your password. if you have a system that lets you reset your own password on the basis that you correctly answer some question like your mother's shoe size, then you might as well just use your mother's shoe size as your password. Etc.

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  78. Dictionary attack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can easily guess my master password if your dictionary includes Mohawk, Flemish and Malagasy.

  79. Choose your 2 factors carefully by Ankh · · Score: 1

    Passwords are commonly used because they have a lot going for them -
    * people understand them
    * they're reasonably easy to implement (especially if you are savvy enough that you only store an md5 or whatever, not the password)
    * most password interfaces are accessible

    You mention phone-based - Google wants me to give them my mobile phone number to enable 2 factor security via SMS, but (1) I don't have a mobile phone, (2) if I did, there's no reception where I live, (3) when I did have one, SMS messages were not free to receive.

    Picture-based systems don't work for people who can't see the pictures. So you need to research an alternative that works for blind users, and possibly also a low-bandwidth alternative that does not rely on audio or video as a fallback for blilnd users.

    So your replacement should start out being accessible and should not cost money for the end user, and should not rely on unreliable external systems (phone netowrk) unless those are all Ok and a given in your environment - even then, locking out even a single blind or mobility impaired employee because they couldn't see the picture or didn't react quickly enough can open your company to a painful law suit large enough to make reverting to passwords seem like a win.

    I don't want to put you off from innovating - but innovat to solve real problems that you've measured, with solutions that have been tested, and that introduce as few new problems as possible.

    --
    Live barefoot!
    free engravings/woodcuts
  80. Passwords will work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For passwords to work they need three characteristics:

      1) They need to be 12 characters or longer

      2) They need to use digits and special characters as well as upper and lower case alphas

      3) They need to be easy to remember.

    The solution is to base your passwords on a street address known to you but not obvious to others.

    For example the address of the White House is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC.

    The password based on it might be "1600$Pennsylvania&Avenue*NW"

    Eureka! A 26 character long password that is easy to remember and contains digits, special characters and both upper and lower case letters.