论文标题
()人们如何在违规后更改密码?
(How) Do people change their passwords after a breach?
论文作者
论文摘要
为了防止在漏洞中损害密码的滥用,消费者应迅速更改受影响的密码和其他帐户上的任何类似密码。理想情况下,受影响的公司应强烈鼓励这种行为,并具有缓解伤害的机制。为了向公司提出有关如何帮助其用户违规后采取这些和其他安全增强行动的建议,我们必须首先对公司后爆发后实践的当前有效性有所了解。为了研究与密码相关的漏洞通知和实践的有效性,我们根据来自249名参与者的实际密码数据进行了研究 - - - 以及在违反公告后是否具有建设性地更改密码的方式。 在249名参与者中,有63名在被破坏的域中有帐户;在公告发布后的三个月内,只有63个更改了密码中的33%,只有13%(63个)这样做。新密码平均比旧密码(在比较log10变换强度时)强1.3倍,尽管大多数较弱或相等的强度。关于新密码,总体而言,新密码与参与者的其他密码更相似,并且参与者在其他站点上也很少更改密码,即使这些密码与违反域上的密码相同或相似。我们的结果强调了在违反和更有效的违规通知后,需要更严格的密码改变要求,以提供全面的建议。
To protect against misuse of passwords compromised in a breach, consumers should promptly change affected passwords and any similar passwords on other accounts. Ideally, affected companies should strongly encourage this behavior and have mechanisms in place to mitigate harm. In order to make recommendations to companies about how to help their users perform these and other security-enhancing actions after breaches, we must first have some understanding of the current effectiveness of companies' post-breach practices. To study the effectiveness of password-related breach notifications and practices enforced after a breach, we examine---based on real-world password data from 249 participants---whether and how constructively participants changed their passwords after a breach announcement. Of the 249 participants, 63 had accounts on breached domains; only 33% of the 63 changed their passwords and only 13% (of 63) did so within three months of the announcement. New passwords were on average 1.3x stronger than old passwords (when comparing log10-transformed strength), though most were weaker or of equal strength. Concerningly, new passwords were overall more similar to participants' other passwords, and participants rarely changed passwords on other sites even when these were the same or similar to their password on the breached domain. Our results highlight the need for more rigorous password-changing requirements following a breach and more effective breach notifications that deliver comprehensive advice.