The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluating Login Challenges as aDefense Against Account Takeover
Open accessAbstract
In this paper, we study the efficacy of login challenges at preventing account takeover, as well as evaluate the amount of friction these challenges create for normal users. These secondary authentication factors-presently deployed at Google, Microsoft, and other major identity providers as part of risk-aware authentication-trigger in response to a suspicious login or account recovery attempt. Using Google as a case study, we evaluate the effectiveness of fourteen device-based, delegation-based, knowledge-based, and resource-based challenges at preventing over 350,000 real-world hijacking attempts stemming from automated bots, phishers, and targeted attackers. We show that knowledge-based challenges prevent as few as 10% of hijacking attempts rooted in phishing and 73% of automated hijacking attempts. Device-based challenges provide the best protection, blocking over 94% of hijacking attempts rooted in phishing and 100% of automated hijacking attempts. We evaluate the usability limitations of each challenge based on a sample of 1.2M legitimate users. Our results illustrate that login challenges act as an important barrier to hijacking, but that friction in the process leads to 52% of legitimate users failing to sign-in-though 97% of users eventually access their account in a short period.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prior work has demonstrated that user verification challenges should augment risk-aware authentication to minimize the risk of account takeover.
“We note that while other services may have made risk-aware decisions not to verify our identity, prior work has demonstrated that such user verification challenges should augment risk-aware authentication to minimize the risk of account takeover [38].”
From Evaluating the Security Posture of Real-World FIDO2 Deployments (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
Passkeys are not device-specific, and as such, currently do not support attestation.
“They are not device-specific, and as such, currently do not support attestation[36].”
From Evaluating the Security Posture of Real-World FIDO2 Deployments (2023) · cites this paper as [36]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- 10.1109/COMST.2017.2651741 · DOI
- 10.1145/2736277.2741691 · DOI
- 10.1109/SP.2012.44 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/1180405.1180427 · DOI
- Marco Cova , Christopher Kruegel , and Giovanni Vigna . There is no free phish: an analysis of "free" and live phishing kits . In Proceedings of the USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies , 2008 . Marco Cova, Christopher Kruegel, and Giovanni Vigna. There is no free phish: an analysis of "free" and live phishing kits. In Proceedings of the USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies, 2008.
- 10.1007/978-3-662-58387-6_9 · DOI
- Duo Security . Guide to two-factor authentication. https://guide.duo.com/ , 2018 . Duo Security. Guide to two-factor authentication. https://guide.duo.com/, 2018.
- Facebook. Facebook has users identify friends in photos to verify accounts, prevent unauthorized access. https://www.adweek.com/digital/facebook-photos-verify/ , 2010 . Facebook. Facebook has users identify friends in photos to verify accounts, prevent unauthorized access. https://www.adweek.com/digital/facebook-photos-verify/, 2010.
- 10.14722/ndss.2016.23240 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.14722/usec.2015.23002 · DOI
- 10.1145/1456424.1456435 · DOI
- Mark Kaufman . Google Authenticator will add a formidable layer of protection to your e-mail account. https://mashable.com/2017/10/29/how-to-set-up-google-authenticator , 2017 . Mark Kaufman. Google Authenticator will add a formidable layer of protection to your e-mail account. https://mashable.com/2017/10/29/how-to-set-up-google-authenticator, 2017.
- Juan Lang , Alexei Czeskis , Dirk Balfanz , Marius Schilder , and Sampath Srinivas . Security keys : Practical cryptographic second factors for the modern web . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security , 2016 . Juan Lang, Alexei Czeskis, Dirk Balfanz, Marius Schilder, and Sampath Srinivas. Security keys: Practical cryptographic second factors for the modern web. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, 2016.
- Grzegorz Milka . Anatomy of account takeover . In Enigma , 2018 . Grzegorz Milka. Anatomy of account takeover. In Enigma, 2018.
- 10.1145/3308558.3313489 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cose.2016.09.009 · DOI
- 10.1145/3133956.3134067 · DOI
- Kurt Thomas and Angelika Moscicki . New research: Understanding the root cause of account takeover. https://security.googleblog.com/2017/11/new-research-understanding-root-cause.html , 2017 . Kurt Thomas and Angelika Moscicki. New research: Understanding the root cause of account takeover. https://security.googleblog.com/2017/11/new-research-understanding-root-cause.html, 2017.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluating the Security Posture of Real-World FIDO2 Deployments
Kuchhal, D., Saad, M., Oest, A., & Li, F. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/3576915.3623063 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Doerfler, P., Thomas, K., Marincenko, M., Ranieri, J., Jiang, Y., Moscicki, A., & McCoy, D.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- Google (United States) (US)
- Venue
- The World Wide Web Conference
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-05-13
- Pages
- 372-382
- OpenAlex
- W2914845368
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 3.39
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Authentication Protocols Security
- Keywords
- account takeover, account hacking, knowledge-based authentication, phishing, bots, account recovery, Google, Microsoft
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review