In this paper, 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 blocklists, where a set of "easy to guess" PINs is disallowed during selection. Two such blocklists are in use today by iOS, for 4-digits (274 PINs) as well as 6-digits (2910 PINs). We extracted both blocklists compared them with four other blocklists, including a small 4-digit (27 PINs), a large 4-digit (2740 PINs), and two placebo blocklists for 4- and 6-digit PINs that always excluded the first-choice PIN. We find that relatively small blocklists in use today by iOS offer little or no benefit against a throttled guessing attack. Security gains are only observed when the blocklists are much larger, which in turn comes at the cost of increased user frustration. Our analysis suggests that a blocklist at about 10% of the PIN space may provide the best balance between usability and security.
翻译:在本文中,我们首次全面研究了在智能手机上收集的用户选择4和6位数的PIN(n=1220)的用户选择4和6位数的PIN(n=1220),参与者明确准备打开设备。我们发现,对于四位数(274个PIN)和六位数(2910个PIN)的四位数攻击者(10、30或100个猜数,匹配智能手机开锁设置),我们用六位数的PIN(6位数的PIN)而不是四位数的PIN(4位数的PIN)来进行首次全面研究,令人惊讶地可能甚至不会增加安全。我们还研究了四位数(2740个PIN)和六位数PIN(4个PIN)的阻隔板的影响,在选择期间不允许使用一套“容易猜到的”的PIN。今天,有两组数(iOS)中的两组名单被使用。我们发现,四位数(4位数(或6位数的)的PIN(4个PIN)使用得最多(10个)的平价)的用户分析显示,今天只有10个安全得益。