4 ms·
How would individuals use that? There are no end of methods using devices to exchange challenge response sequences, but in practical security we have to deal w
by nonrandomstring 2y ago
How would individuals use that?
There are no end of methods using devices to exchange challenge
response sequences, but in practical security we have to deal with
real people in real contexts. It's why encryption took 30 years to get
traction. Passwords already make sense even to a primary school child.
From TFA:
> It's interesting that, in this new age of high-tech AI identity
fraud, this ancient invention—a special word or phrase known to
few—can still prove so useful.
There are reasons that passwords remain and probably always will be a
superior technology [0], and why adding more layers of "solutions"
like biometrics and multi-factors actually just increases the attack
surface.
[0] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/secrets https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/secrets
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- LinuxBender 2y agoIt starts at home and is not used until required. When I was a child I was taught to say "I love you" on the phone or in person if I was under duress. We had similar processes in the military that were also taught in person or existed in a binder next to the phone. Say one phrase and everything is dandy. Say another phrase and they send in the cavalry.
- nonrandomstring 2y agoYou're lucky to have good carers. I wonder how many parents or organisations think to give this training? Haven't read the FBI guidance yet, but it seems they're suggesting we start teaching this outside of professional scope, to everyone. I think that's a jolly good idea and will be thinking of how to build it into civic cybersecurity syllabus. Duress signals and a challenge-response for identification are different beasts, but if we're going to teach people verbal signalling to thwart generative scams then may as well teach the whole gamut of craft.