4 ms·

Why do you think that both devices need to be exploited for a problem in the scheme to occur?

fc417fc802 2y ago
> the scheme As I already stated I'm no longer certain what scheme we're actually taking about. Is there some reason you don't feel like elaborating? For my part I thought we were taking about a proof of possession scheme in addition to regular auth. The "regular auth" scheme was unspecified so could be password, software based TOTP, hardware token, whatever. Widespread proof of possession already exists in the form of chips in bank cards. It seems to be quite resilient to attack in practice. Even if I use software on my phone for proof of possession you still have to compromise the computer I'm actually logging in with, no? So the attack surface is either the same (primary device) or increased (primary plus secondary, simultaneously) depending on various practical details regarding implementation and usage. If the "regular auth" scheme involves a half decent hardware token then good luck compromising that remotely. I won't be betting in your favor.
awesome_dude 2y ago
For some reason the comment responding to this cannot be replied to (probably a good thing given the lack of understanding that author has demonstrated thus far)
- fc417fc802 2y ago
  What's the point of participating on a site like HN if instead of technical discussion you opt to dodge questions and make condescending but vague statements? How could I possibly demonstrate lack of understanding when you actively avoid clarifying what you're even talking about in the first place? Perhaps what you had in mind are the PoP tokens from RFC 7800? (Sure would be nice not to play guessing games though.) Given that those are intended to replace OAuth bearer tokens they are quite a decent upgrade from a security perspective. Used with a purely software based password manager it is no longer enough to simply exfiltrate a token from the browser. Used with TPM backed keys it is approximately equivalent to the chip in a bank card.
  - awesome_dude 2y ago
    > What's the point of participating on a site like HN Because I get to talk to people that actually understand technical discussions. > How could I possibly demonstrate lack of understanding when you actively avoid clarifying what you're even talking about in the first place? You came into the thread with no understanding, then some time later decided to play word games. All of the rest of your contributions from now are going straight to /dev/null where they belong.

> the scheme As I already stated I'm no longer certain what scheme we're actually taking about. Is there some reason you don't feel like elaborating? For my part I thought we were taking about a proof of possession scheme in addition to regular auth. The "regular auth" scheme was unspecified so could be password, software based TOTP, hardware token, whatever. Widespread proof of possession already exists in the form of chips in bank cards. It seems to be quite resilient to attack in practice. Even if I use software on my phone for proof of possession you still have to compromise the computer I'm actually logging in with, no? So the attack surface is either the same (primary device) or increased (primary plus secondary, simultaneously) depending on various practical details regarding implementation and usage. If the "regular auth" scheme involves a half decent hardware token then good luck compromising that remotely. I won't be betting in your favor.

awesome_dude 2y ago

For some reason the comment responding to this cannot be replied to (probably a good thing given the lack of understanding that author has demonstrated thus far)

fc417fc802 2y ago
What's the point of participating on a site like HN if instead of technical discussion you opt to dodge questions and make condescending but vague statements? How could I possibly demonstrate lack of understanding when you actively avoid clarifying what you're even talking about in the first place? Perhaps what you had in mind are the PoP tokens from RFC 7800? (Sure would be nice not to play guessing games though.) Given that those are intended to replace OAuth bearer tokens they are quite a decent upgrade from a security perspective. Used with a purely software based password manager it is no longer enough to simply exfiltrate a token from the browser. Used with TPM backed keys it is approximately equivalent to the chip in a bank card.
- awesome_dude 2y ago
  > What's the point of participating on a site like HN Because I get to talk to people that actually understand technical discussions. > How could I possibly demonstrate lack of understanding when you actively avoid clarifying what you're even talking about in the first place? You came into the thread with no understanding, then some time later decided to play word games. All of the rest of your contributions from now are going straight to /dev/null where they belong.