Hi Nat,

Yeah, two-step (TOTP) blocks keyloggers, not phishing (TOTP was invented in 
1984, before we had networks and real-time attacks).  breakins worldwide have 
doubled in the last 12months, and risen 800% in the banking industry, almost 
exclusively on the back of phishing... risk-based and multifactor are both 
widespread, and absolutely not working (and don't get me started on the 
stupidity of "risk based" - the false positives are making the internet 
unusable for travelers and other legit people, and having no effect whatsoever 
on crime).

The protocol is the cause of the problem.  It's one-way-only, which is why 
phishing is working so well.  It's not enough to authenticate a user to a site, 
the opposite needs to take place as well, at the same time, as part of the 
protocol.

Kind Regards,
Chris Drake


Thursday, September 25, 2014, 6:12:01 AM, you wrote:


Most large providers, as I understand, are using risk based authentication and 
also offers two-step or two-factor authentication. 
So, simply stealing password would not work: they are phishing resistant.
It looks more like a deployment issue than a protocol issue to me. 
Correct me if I am wrong. 

Man-in-the-browser attack is something else. It needs continuous or second 
channel authentication. This looks more interesting from a protocol point of 
view. 

Nat

2014-09-25 2:14 GMT+09:00 Chris Drake <[email protected]>:
Hi Nat,

I remember back when the original OpenID was forming, and a bunch of my 
suggestions got shoved "out of scope"... which are now being brought back in to 
scope via OpenID Connect.  It's cold comfort, but at least I get to brag "I 
told you so" after the fact:-)

Scratch the surface of any megahack, and 9 times out of 10 it was caused by 
phishing.  Personally, I don't see the point wasting effort on OpenID Connect 
when it's merely going to exacerbate what is already a crippling problem.

There's a bunch of smart and experienced people on this list - they should put 
their heads together and use the power and knowledge present to fix what is 
reported at being behind 91% of the worlds security problems, most especially 
when OpenID users are significantly more vulnerable to these attacks, and 
at-risk once attacked.  "Get it right" is better than "get it now" IMHO.

Kind Regards,
Chris Drake



Wednesday, September 24, 2014, 9:57:03 PM, you wrote:


The authentication mechanism itself is out of scope. 
You can, as an OP, select whatever the authentication mechanism you may want to 
use. 
OpenID Connect is concerned about transferring the information around the 
authentication event to another party. 
It is a federation protocol. 

Nat

2014-09-25 1:17 GMT+09:00 Chris Drake <[email protected]>:
Hi,

Can anyone tell me if any kind of mutual-authentication or other kind of 
phishing-protection is present anywhere in the specs?

Kind Regards,
Chris Drake



-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en






-- 
Nat Sakimura (=nat)
Chairman, OpenID Foundation
http://nat.sakimura.org/
@_nat_en

_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs

Reply via email to