Identify and Verify Users Based on How They Type

LinucksGirl writes to share an IBM DeveloperWorks article that shows how to support user verification through keystroke-dynamics processing by modifying the GNOME Display Manager (GDM). You can create and store a one-way encrypted hash of your keystroke patterns when entering your user name. The article shows how to add code to GDM to read current keystroke patterns and permit a user to log in when the characteristics are a match. An interesting idea to be sure but I know I certainly am not that consistent when I type, so I'm skeptical of how well this may work.

not gonna work

[superwiz (655733)]

Well, it might work if they allow for a rather broad variation in the frequence of mistakes. But personally, I make much more typos depending on how tired I am and how much caffeine I've had lately. I would assume that others do too. So when I am well-rested I might appear to be a completely different person from when I am even slightly tired.

Re:not gonna work

[RobBebop (947356)]

Given the repletion required to type and retype our names and login IDs over the past 5-10 years, our fingers are conditioned to type these patterns quickly and repeatably.

I can type my typical "lastname/firstinitial" login name in about a third of a second. I can type my "firstname.lastname" in about half a second.

Given 5 minutes of practice with my name, you would probably be able to impersonate me - but as long as this system doesn't lock me out from my own account, this is a successful barrier that will make it harder for you to get into my system.

Then again... having a password that is hard to hack and running an operating system that is not easily hackable are stronger barriers that protect me from your infiltrations...

Re:not gonna work

[TubeSteak (669689)]

Given the repletion required to type and retype our names and login IDs over the past 5-10 years, our fingers are conditioned to type these patterns quickly and repeatably.

Never IM'ed or IRC'ed with a drunk person, have you?

On the upside, no more embarrassing drunken e-mails to come back and bite you!

Re:

[Jurily (900488)]

You get that with a well-formed password too. I can't type mine drunk, ever.

BTW, there's really nothing more easy/secure than a password. You even get to choose which end of a spectrum you want.
I never cease to be amazed at the lenghts people go to make something better...

The big question is, would you trust a GNOME developer to distinguish you from your sister if you can't be bothered to make up a password she can't guess? Nevermind more serious issues.

Re:

[WaltBusterkeys (1156557)]

Or first thing in the morning after getting into work on a cold wintery day. Frozen fingers do not type well.

Re:not gonna work

[moderatorrater (1095745)]

plus for me, this will only work if they test it against another login with the same username and password. The rhythm and speed of my typing in a username depends on which one it is, and the same goes for the password.

However, within the bounds of an identical username/password combination, I would imagine that it would work well for me. The problem is that if there are extenuating circumstances, this would lock me or someone else out of the computer. For instance, what if my wife needed to log in for me while I'm on a business trip? Or I die? Or I break my arm and have to type with one hand? I imagine the usefulness of this technology is in merely logging the "signature" pattern rather than locking someone else based on it. Bruce Schneier [schneier.com] has the basic arguments and a much better analysis than I could produce.

Re:

[TubeSteak (669689)]

The problem is that if there are extenuating circumstances, this would lock me or someone else out of the computer. For instance, what if my wife needed to log in for me while I'm on a business trip? Or I die? Or I break my arm and have to type with one hand?

Treat your user account like it has a hidden volume.

Your 'signature' password gives you full access to the account. Your password gives you basic access to the account, with the option of another password to unlock full access to your files and settings..

Re:not gonna work

[Z34107 (925136)]

There are characteristics in common with everything "normal" you type - for example, Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing(tm) back in the Glory Days of Windows 3.11 could tell me that my 4th finger on my left hand is weak - making a lot of typos on the "w", you see. It was nifty looking at the profiles of every user in that program for little tidbits like that, and logging onto my brother's profile and laughing as it commented how much he had "improved."

But... do those things apply when typing a password? The whole consistent rhythm and speed thing? Or maybe that makes it easier.

Perhaps a better solution would be to emulate voice recognition - train the security software to recognize your typing, and have it watch you as you're logged in. Just as you can train voice recognition to work with multiple speakers, you could train the security software to recognize "sober me", "drunk me", "caffeinated me", etc. (And not let "drunk me" send e-mail, and maybe schedule my development IDE processes at a higher priority for "caffeinated me", etc.)

Re:not gonna work

[pcgc1xn (922943)]

One thing which will kill it for sure is using a different keyboard.

Desktop to laptop - *slightly* different keyboard layout.
Different laptops - possibly different
US keyboard to English keyboard - hope your passphrase doesn't have any special characters or punctuation.
Any other language keyboard - those things are bad enough to type on at all, but trying to get your timing right? Forget it. If you have never had they joy of meeting one, as well as many of the punctuation keys being in different places, a few of the letters are as well. Just a few mind you, just enough so you fall back into touch typing and look back and find that all of your w's are actually z's

Some of these problems are probably not too bad for logging into Gnome, but the idea is basically limited to anything where you are physically in front of the machine you are logging into, and the input device is the same every time. If you are going to limit it to that, then requiring a webcam and doing image recognition is probably easier on both sides.

And all you need is a slightly cleverer key logger to defeat it - instead of recording the keystrokes in order, you need to record the keystrokes and time.

Good to see people thinking about how to improve on passwords though.

Re:

[SharpFang (651121)]

I wouldn't be surprised if it produced less false negatives than standard login/password pair. By false negatives I mean typos in username/password.

I mean, I don't know about you but I make typing mistakes at my login and password about as often as not, though I type them always in a consistent rhythm. The system could very neatly ignore the typos resulting from pressing a neighbor key or even typing with your hand a whole line of keys away, meaning you got half of what you typed wrong. "Timing is right, he

Accidents?

[blueboy31 (822804)]

This works great until you lose a finger, thumb, hand, etc in that freak accident. Talk about adding insult to injury -- your own computer won't even accept you with your newfound handicap!

Cat-like typing detected?

[Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784)]

I'll settle for getting GDM to distinguish between a my typing and my cat's.

Oww I broke a finger...

[LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407)]

...And now I can't log in.

Pass.

Re:

[baudilus (665036)]

Did they say the same thing about biometric authentication (e.g. fingerprints)? Besides, if you're checking /. right after you break your finger, you might want to get out of the basement more often. :P

Re:

[ShieldW0lf (601553)]

Biometric authentication is a far, far stupider idea than this is. Yes, not being able to log in when you're drunk is bad, but having to exchange your finger and your eyeball for a new one because someone posted a high-resolution photo of them online is much, much worse.

Re:

[ArsonSmith (13997)]

That'd be really bad if the security mechanism only relied on one of the three main identifiers. Luckily most will use at least 2.

Hint:
3 main security identifiers:
1. something you are (biometric, finger print, retina scan)
2. something you have (id card)
3. something you know (pin or password)

Re:

[shawn(at)fsu (447153)]

3 alone doesn't protect from shoulder surfing. While someone can look at my eye all day it's going to be difficult for most people do get my retina scan. 1, while it is a subset of 2, is supposed to be something you can't accidentally misplace, or more importantly it's supposed to be something some nefarious person can't take from you. I agree with GP you need all three.

Re:

[denmarkw00t (892627)]

To the broken finger crowd and the "few too manys": you should also note that it didn't appear to me that this feature would lock you out, to me it seemed more like it might speed up the login process while making it slightly more secure - no clicking "Login" because it "knows" its you, and if its someone pecking at the keyboard it could send you an alert via /var/log/yourlogofchoice for later review (or mail sms whathaveyou). Of course, I'm sure you could change the level of aggressiveness to not allow som

Obvious issue

[Gat0r30y (957941)]

How am I supposed to log in after a few too many? Wait, maybe thats not an issue after all, maybe its a feature.

Re:Obvious issue

[baudilus (665036)]

I'd be much happier if Blackberries had Breathalyzers before they allow people to email me at 2 AM. Good grief!

All Cell phones , Not just the BBs

[DRAGONWEEZEL (125809)]

Please, drunk dialing should be a civil infraction penalized in this manner

for each # called...

1st offense:
        A stern warning.
2nd offense:
        $250 restitution to the victim, 1 months probation
3rd offense:
        Death.

They exist

[PlatyPaul (690601)]

Actually, such technology exists [go.com]. Here's C|Net's shorter-nicer writeup [news.com]. LG doesn't have any info on their US pages yet, but it's coming.

That's OK

[treeves (963993)]

My guess is that your inconsistency is part of what distinguishes you from other typists and the software uses that information to its advantage. Other people are more consistent, less consistent, inconsistent in different ways. I know I type with about four fingers: my left index finger, my right index and middle fingers, and my right thumb, and I also know I tend to make certain typos more often than others. I suspect that those things contribute to the distinct pattern in my typing that could be identified. Still, I'm sure I would not want to use to such a scheme for identity verification.

Privacy implications

[megaditto (982598)]

What would this program think if it detected you periodically typing with just one hand?

Re:

[baudilus (665036)]

Then Clippy pops up.

Hi! It looks like your finger is broken! Would you like help filling out your insurance claim?

|Yes| |No|

Re:

[thePowerOfGrayskull (905905)]

Then Clippy pops up. Hi! It looks like your finger is broken! Would you like help filling out your insurance claim? |Yes| |No|

I think you have it wrong. After a minute or two of such typing:

"Hi! It looks like this is becoming detrimental to your performance. Would you like me to order you some vasoline to help speed up the process next time?"

Re:

[Hrodvitnir (101283)]

The school district I work for uses similar technology to verify all staff members. The software gathers up typing method from 9 entries of username and password, and allows for a percentage match - which we currently have set at the recommended 37%. We have a small percentage of users that have trouble logging in due to inconsistencies. For these users we recommend they slow down and consciously pick a rhythm for typing their username and password. For those with medical issues, we have a system in place

Check more often?

[baudilus (665036)]

While they're at it, they should have the software periodically verify that whoever is typing on the system is (or could be) the same person that is logged in.

But then again, how would I prank people at work when they leave their systems unlocked?

Don't prank gnome users

[megaditto (982598)]

Having smelly feet all over their desktop is punishment enough...

inconsistent

[flynt (248848)]

An interesting idea to be sure but I know I certainly am not that consistent when I type, so I'm skeptical of how well this may work.

That's precisely what some statistical methods are designed to do, find patterns about the inconsistencies. I haven't read this proposal, so can't comment more, but 'leaning' in the presence of variation is basically what modern statistics is all about.

This concept is about 3 years old if IIRC

[DRAGONWEEZEL (125809)]

Maybe not w/ gnome, but I remember a Slashdot article about this a few years back. One thing to note, while some people might be irregular, almost anyone who keys in a UID every day will have some sort of "pattern" to the time between keystrokes.

Typematic rate lol....

It's really interesting to see what the differences are between key presses when recording a macro w/ a G15. (if you have this awesome keyboard, and don't know what I am talking about try it out!) I have done this cause I am weird... but you could try too!

If you record a significant count of you typing in a UID and PW on a given site (that you use frequently) you will find a unique structure to the timing of the keystrokes. While the G15 doesn't go to the # of digits needed for secure authorization, it can show you that there is little variance over a large number of true trials.

I think this may have been the paper /. discussed

[DRAGONWEEZEL (125809)]

http://www.springerlink.com/content/tcwlla3ptdd5u2ae/ [springerlink.com]

Re:

[jellomizer (103300)]

Older then that...
I thought about it when I was a kid running my own BBS. The old BBS Software had a realtime display of what the person is typeing so I could normally tell if it is someone who is the origional user or someone using someones else account. I though about making a program that checks the time between keystrokes and give them a level of error, as extra security... but I decided not to do it, for the main reasons. Somone may have something in their hands that day or. Bit tired or Hyper, also

Flashbacks...

[DRAGONWEEZEL (125809)]

Ahh you made me remember sweet violet, and BRE, and the Tacoma Area BBS listing (TABBS) that was printed in the paper. I met and ran into a few sysops in my day but never had the resources at that time to start one up. I often think the BBS format may rise again over tcp/ip if P2P gets destroyed. It'd be so easy to hide them on open networks accross the country.

But that is offtopic, and I am probably flagged as a terrorist after that last sentance...
Oh well.

Re:

[jellomizer (103300)]

ATDT 5551234
[click...buzz...Beep.Beep.Beep.Bop.Bee.Bu.baa...Dedededeeeeee....Kcshrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr]
Connected 2400 bps
Login: jellomizer
User not found

Login: jelomizer
User not found

Login: +++ath0

No Carrier

Insensitive Clods!!!

[explosivejared (1186049)]

I don't know HOW to type!!

Re:

[CaptainPatent (1087643)]

I don't know HOW to type!!

But that's the great part, it recognizes that pattern too...

Just stare at your keyboard and BAM! you're logged on!

CTRL-ALT-DEL

[c0d3r (156687)]

Dang, I still find it hard to press the C-T-R-L-A-L-T-D-E-L keys hard to press at the same time before entering my password on windows.

Re:

[wattrlz (1162603)]

Luckily TFA only mentions implementation in gnome, then.

Ever thought about getting one of these [sadinoff.com]?

sure, this can work...

[zappepcs (820751)]

Why not add a signature verification pad to the pc as well? If you can type the right way and reasonably falsify a signature you can login and go to /. to read all about it....

Would be nice as a supplement, however

[Thought1 (1132989)]

It wouldn't be good as a primary means of validation (for the reasons listed in prior comments), but it would be good as a supplemental validation, giving a "higher likelihood" that the person is who they say they are.

Re:

[wattrlz (1162603)]

It would certainly be better than answering all those stupid questions when trying to view your checking account balance online.

It'll never work

[amplt1337 (707922)]

How on God's green earth am I going to write down my keystroke patterns on a sticky note on my monitor???

lock out injured users?

[drfireman (101623)]

A quick skim, and I didn't see any details on the false alarm rate of this method, or any detail on how a user could log in with a broken (or severely papercut!) finger. Or when breaking in a new keyoard. It would certainly be a fatal problem for this method if it would lock out users who for whatever reason have their timings temporarily altered. It would also be a pretty fatal flaw if it turns out there's a substantial false alarm rate.

Useful after the fact, perhaps

[6Yankee (597075)]

I don't fancy using this as a replacement for login/password, but if you haul Joe User down to HR for surfing pr0n, he pulls the "Naughty Bob stole my password" trick, and you can demonstrate that the usage pattern looks a hell of a lot more like Joe User's other sessions than Naughty Bob's... ...or vice versa, and have some idea who really did steal Joe's password.

Bank does this

[RandoX (828285)]

My bank does this with my login info. You can know my username and password, but if you don't type it like I do, you don't get in.

Might make a good alarm, but poor authorization.

[Vellmont (569020)]

I just have to believe this is going to produce a lot of rejected authorizations that shouldn't have been rejected. Also as someone pointed out, what about the legitimate times when someone else is using your username/password? (your boss needs something while you're away on vacation, etc).

This might work out well for some kind of intrusion detection system though. Look for cases where there's two people consistently typing in the password two different ways. Then set off an alert to the administrator. There's legit cases for that of course (root/admin password comes to mind), but you just exclude those cases.

Large enough sample set?

[192939495969798999 (58312)]

I don't think a username is enough of a sample set to determine a typing pattern. Wouldn't you need to copy down a paragraph of text to have any chance of determining patterns in typing style? I.e. at the very least, "the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy sleeping dog" type stuff to hit all the characters?

Oblig Bash quote

[xtracto (837672)]

From bash.org [bash.org]

  HOW THE FUCK CAN YOU TELL THAT I'M 13 BY LOOKING AT WHAT I'M WRITEING??????????????????????

stupid lameness filterstupid lameness filterstupid lameness filterstupid lameness filter stupid lameness filter Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters. Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.

Re:

[ArcherB (796902)]

Something like a password that you've typed hundreds of times probably has a more regular pattern than you think, unless you regularly get interrupted in the half second i takes for you to type it... Muscle memory, etc

That's all find and dandy until you break a finger, or get a hang nail or try to log in while holding a cup of coffee or any of the limitless things that can happen to slow, speed up, or change the rhythm of your typing.