Fallback authentication, the process of re-establishing access to an account when the primary authenticator is unavailable, holds critical significance. Approaches range from secondary channels like email and SMS to personal knowledge questions (PKQs) and social authentication. A key difference to primary authentication is that the duration between enrollment and authentication can be much longer, typically months or years. However, few systems have been studied over extended timeframes, making it difficult to know how well these systems truly help users recover their accounts. We also lack meaningful comparisons of schemes as most prior work examined two mechanisms at most. We report the results of a long-term user study of the usability of fallback authentication over 18 months to provide a fair comparison of the four most commonly used fallback authentication methods. We show that users prefer email and SMS-based methods, while mechanisms based on PKQs and trustees lag regarding successful resets and convenience.

Login notifications intend to inform users about sign-ins and help them protect their accounts from unauthorized access. Notifications are usually sent if a login deviates from previous ones, potentially indicating malicious activity. They contain information like the location, date, time, and device used to sign in. Users are challenged to verify whether they recognize the login (because it was them or someone they know) or to protect their account from unwanted access. In a user study, we explore users’ comprehension, reactions, and expectations of login notifications. We utilize two treatments to measure users’ behavior in response to notifications sent for a login they initiated or based on a malicious actor relying on statistical sign-in information. We find that users identify legitimate logins but need more support to halt malicious sign-ins. We discuss the identified problems and give recommendations for service providers to ensure usable and secure logins for everyone.

In this article, we provide the first comprehensive study of user-chosen four- and six-digit PINs ( n =1705) collected on smartphones with participants being explicitly primed for device unlocking. We find that against a throttled attacker (with 10, 30, or 100 guesses, matching the smartphone unlock setting), using six-digit PINs instead of four-digit PINs provides little to no increase in security and surprisingly may even decrease security. We also study the effects of blocklists, where a set of “easy to guess” PINs is disallowed during selection. Two such blocklists are in use today by iOS, for four digits (274 PINs) as well as six digits (2,910 PINs). We extracted both blocklists and compared them with six other blocklists, three for each PIN length. In each case, we had a small (four-digit: 27 PINs; six-digit: 29 PINs), a large (four-digit: 2,740 PINs; six-digit: 291,000 PINs), and a placebo blocklist that always excluded the first-choice PIN. For four-digit PINs, we find that the relatively small blocklist in use today by iOS offers little to no benefit against a throttled guessing attack. Security gains are only observed when the blocklist is much larger. In the six-digit case, we were able to reach a similar security level with a smaller blocklist. As the user frustration increases with the blocklists size, developers should employ a blocklist that is as small as possible while ensuring the desired security. Based on our analysis, we recommend that for four-digit PINs a blocklist should contain the 1,000 most popular PINs to provide the best balance between usability and security and for six-digit PINs the 2,000 most popular PINs should be blocked.

We provide the first comprehensive study of user-chosen 4- and 6-digit PINs (n = 1220) collected on smartphones with participants being explicitly primed for device unlocking. We find that against a throttled attacker (with 10, 30, or 100 guesses, matching the smartphone unlock setting), using 6-digit PINs instead of 4-digit PINs provides little to no increase in security, and surprisingly may even decrease security. We also study the effects of blacklists, where a set of "easy to guess" PINs is disallowed during selection. Two such blacklists are in use today by iOS, for 4-digits (274 PINs) as well as 6-digits (2910 PINs). We extracted both blacklists compared them with four other blacklists, including a small 4-digit (27 PINs), a large 4-digit (2740 PINs), and two placebo blacklists for 4- and 6-digit PINs that always excluded the first-choice PIN. We find that relatively small blacklists in use today by iOS offer little or no benefit against a throttled guessing attack. Security gains are only observed when the blacklists are much larger, which in turn comes at the cost of increased user frustration. Our analysis suggests that a blacklist at about 10 % of the PIN space may provide the best balance between usability and security.