Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 17 Jul 2017]
Title:On the Pitfalls of End-to-End Encrypted Communications: A Study of Remote Key-Fingerprint Verification
View PDFAbstract:Many widely used Internet messaging and calling apps, such as WhatsApp, Viber, Telegram, and Signal, have deployed an end-to-end encryption functionality. To defeat potential MITM attackers against the key exchange protocol, the approach relies on users to perform a code verification task whereby each user must compare the code (a fingerprint of the cryptographic keys) computed by her app with the one computed by the other user's app and reject the session if the two do not match.
In this paper, we study the security and usability of this human-centered code verification task for a setting where the end users are remotely located, and compare it as a baseline to a less frequent scenario where the users are in close proximity. We consider several variations of the code presentation and verification methods, incorporated into representative real-world apps, including codes encoded as numbers or images, displayed on the screen, and verbally spoken by the users. We perform a human factors study in a lab setting to quantify the security and usability of these different methods.
Our study results expose key weaknesses in the security and usability of the code verification methods employed in the apps. First, we show that most code verification methods offer poor security (high false accepts) and low usability (high false rejects and low user experience ratings) in the remote setting. Second, we demonstrate that, security and usability under the remote code verification setting is significantly lower than that in the proximity setting. We attribute this result to the increased cognitive overhead associated with comparing the codes across two apps on the same device (remote setting) rather than across two devices (proximity setting). Overall, our work serves to highlight a serious vulnerability of Internet-based communication apps in the remote setting stemming from human errors.
Submission history
From: Maliheh Shirvanian [view email][v1] Mon, 17 Jul 2017 17:05:43 UTC (949 KB)
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.