Risk-based authentication (RBA) aims to protect users against attacks involving stolen passwords. RBA monitors features during login, and requests re-authentication when feature values widely differ from those previously observed. It is recommended by various national security organizations, and users perceive it more usable than and equally secure to equivalent two-factor authentication. Despite that, RBA is still used by very few online services. Reasons for this include a lack of validated open resources on RBA properties, implementation, and configuration. This effectively hinders the RBA research, development, and adoption progress.
To close this gap, we provide the first long-term RBA analysis on a real-world large-scale online service. We collected feature data of 3.3 million users and 31.3 million login attempts over more than 1 year. Based on the data, we provide (i) studies on RBA’s real-world characteristics plus its configurations and enhancements to balance usability, security, and privacy; (ii) a machine learning–based RBA parameter optimization method to support administrators finding an optimal configuration for their own use case scenario; (iii) an evaluation of the round-trip time feature’s potential to replace the IP address for enhanced user privacy; and (iv) a synthesized RBA dataset to reproduce this research and to foster future RBA research. Our results provide insights on selecting an optimized RBA configuration so that users profit from RBA after just a few logins. The open dataset enables researchers to study, test, and improve RBA for widespread deployment in the wild.
Software developers build complex systems using plenty of third-party libraries. Documentation is key to understand and use the functionality provided via the libraries’ APIs. Therefore, functionality is the main focus of contemporary API documentation, while cross-cutting concerns such as security are almost never considered at all, especially when the API itself does not provide security features. Documentations of JavaScript libraries for use in web applications, e.g., do not specify how to add or adapt a Content Security Policy (CSP) to mitigate content injection attacks like Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This is unfortunate, as security-relevant API documentation might have an influence on secure coding practices and prevailing major vulnerabilities such as XSS. For the first time, we study the effects of integrating security-relevant information in non-security API documentation. For this purpose, we took CSP as an exemplary study object and extended the official Google Maps JavaScript API documentation with security-relevant CSP information in three distinct manners. Then, we evaluated the usage of these variations in a between-group eye-tracking lab study involving N=49 participants. Our observations suggest: (1) Developers are focused on elements with code examples. They mostly skim the documentation while searching for a quick solution to their programming task. This finding gives further evidence to results of related studies. (2) The location where CSP-related code examples are placed in non-security API documentation significantly impacts the time it takes to find this security-relevant information. In particular, the study results showed that the proximity to functional-related code examples in documentation is a decisive factor. (3) Examples significantly help to produce secure CSP solutions. (4) Developers have additional information needs that our approach cannot meet.
Overall, our study contributes to a first understanding of the impact of security-relevant information in non-security API documentation on CSP implementation. Although further research is required, our findings emphasize that API producers should take responsibility for adequately documenting security aspects and thus supporting the sensibility and training of developers to implement secure systems. This responsibility also holds in seemingly non-security relevant contexts.
Risk-based authentication (RBA) is an adaptive security measure to strengthen password-based authentication against account takeover attacks. Our study on 65 participants shows that users find RBA more usable than two-factor authentication equivalents and more secure than password-only authentication. We identify pitfalls and provide guidelines for putting RBA into practice.