The present invention relates to computer security in general, and, more particularly, to authentication.
In some instances it is desirable for security reasons to require that the user of a data-processing system (e.g., a wireless telecommunications terminal, a personal computer, a server, etc.) be authenticated before the user is permitted to access an application or resource of the data-processing system. Typically a user is presented with an authentication challenge, and the user must supply a valid response to the challenge. Examples of different types of authentication challenges include:
The present invention enables authentication frequency (i.e., the length of time between authenticating and re-authenticating a user) and challenge type (e.g., username/password, fingerprint recognition, voice recognition, etc.) to be determined based on what software applications a user is running on a data-processing system (e.g., a payroll application, a browser-based banking application, an email client, etc.), and how those applications are being used (e.g., what functions are used, what data is input to or output by the application, how often and for how long applications are used, what input devices are used, what output devices are used, the speed and manner in which data is input to an application, etc.) In accordance with the illustrative embodiment, both current and historical application usage can be considered in these determinations.
The present invention is advantageous in that it enables authentication frequency to be increased (i.e., less time between re-authentication challenges, which corresponds to tighter security) and the challenge type to be stronger (i.e., more secure) in situations where it is more likely that a malicious user has gained access to a data-processing system, or where a false person having access can be dangerous to the real user. For example, such situations might include:
The present invention also advantageously enables the selection of an authentication challenge type that is less intrusive to a user based on current application usage. For example, a voice recognition challenge might be issued when a user is typing away at the keyboard in a spreadsheet application, while a typed username/password challenge might be issued when a user is playing a voice-controlled videogame.
The illustrative embodiment comprises: presenting a first authentication challenge at a data-processing system at time t1; and presenting a second authentication challenge at a data-processing system at time t2; wherein the magnitude of t2-t1 is based on usage of one or more applications of said data-processing system at one or more instants in time interval [t1, t2].
For the purposes of the specification and claims, the term “calendrical time” is defined as indicative of one or more of the following:
(i) a time (e.g., 16:23:58, etc.),
(ii) one or more temporal designations (e.g., Tuesday, November, etc.),
(iii) one or more events (e.g., Thanksgiving, John's birthday, etc.), and
(iv) a time span (e.g., 8:00 PM to 9:00 PM, etc.).
Transceiver 110 is capable of receiving external signals (e.g., via a wired network, via a wireless network, etc.) and forwarding information encoded in these signals to processor 160, and of receiving information from processor 160 and transmitting signals that encode this information (e.g., via a wired network, via a wireless network, etc.), in well-known fashion.
Memory 120 is capable of storing data, program source code, and executable instructions, as is well-known in the art, and might be any combination of random-access memory (RAM), flash memory, disk drive, etc. These are examples of non-transitory computer-readable storage media which store instructions for controlling a processor to perform certain steps that are disclosed herein. In accordance with the illustrative embodiment, memory 120 is capable of storing one or more applications (e.g., a payroll application, a video game, an email client, etc.), and of storing information regarding the use of these applications, such as how often an application is used, the time of last use, what functions in an application are used, how often functions are used, and so forth.
Clock 130 is capable of transmitting the current time, date, and day of the week to processor 160, in well-known fashion.
Input devices 140-1 through 140-N are capable of receiving input from a user and of forwarding the input to processor 160, in well-known fashion. Examples of input devices 140-1 through 140-N might include a numeric keypad, an alphanumeric keyboard, a fingerprint sensor, a microphone, a magnetic card reader, and so forth.
Output devices 150-1 through 150-M are capable of receiving information, including authentication challenges, from processor 160, and of outputting the information to a user, in well-known fashion. Examples of output devices 150-1 through 150-M might include a video display, a speaker, a vibration mechanism, and so forth.
Processor 160 is a general-purpose processor that is capable of reading data from and writing data into memory 120, of executing applications stored in memory 120, and of executing the tasks described below and with respect to
At task 210, data-processing system 100 determines which of its applications are being used, and which functions of the applications are being used, in well-known fashion.
At task 220, the input capabilities of data-processing system 100 are determined. As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, in embodiments of the present invention in which task 220 is performed by data-processing system 100 itself, data-processing system 100 merely has to check which of input devices 140-1 through 140-N are currently enabled and functional; while in some other embodiments of the present invention, an authentication server or some other entity might transmit a message to data-processing system 100 that explicitly asks for its input capabilities; while in yet some other embodiments, an authentication server or some other entity might transmit a message to data-processing system 100 that asks for its manufacturer and model (e.g., Apple iPhone®, etc.), and then consult a database to determine the input capabilities of data-processing system 100 (under the assumption that all of data-processing system 100's capabilities are currently enabled and functional).
At task 230, an authentication challenge type T and time Δ between challenges are determined based on:
As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, by considering what application functions are used and what inputs are supplied to the functions, the illustrative embodiment is capable of considering the potential cost or harm to the real user, or to his or her organization, in the determinations of task 230. For example, a large cash withdrawal or a drastic reduction in the price of an item for sale could be very costly to the real user, while a defaced web page or a denial of service attack could result in unfavorable press for the real user's employer.
As will further be appreciated by those skilled in the art, in some embodiments of the present invention, an authentication challenge type might comprise a plurality of successive challenges, rather than a single challenge, thereby enabling even “stronger” authentication challenges. For example, a challenge type determined at task 230 might be “fingerprint recognition, followed by iris scan.”
As will further be appreciated by those skilled in the art, for embodiments of the present invention in which task 230 is performed by data-processing system 100, the current day and time might be obtained from clock 130, or might be obtained from an external source via transceiver 110. Moreover, although in the illustrative embodiment historical application usage information is stored in memory 120, in some other embodiments of the present invention this information might be stored in an external database and accessed by data-processing system 100 via transceiver 110. As will further be appreciated by those skilled in the art, in some embodiments of the present invention, the collection, storing, and organization of this historical information might be performed by data-processing system 100 itself, while in some other embodiments of the present invention, another entity (e.g., an authentication server, etc.) might perform these functions.
At task 240, an authentication challenge of type T is generated, in well-known fashion.
At task 250, the authentication challenge generated at task 240 is presented to the user of data-processing system 100 at a time in accordance with Δ, in well-known fashion. After task 250, the method of
It is to be understood that the disclosure teaches just one example of the illustrative embodiment and that many variations of the invention can easily be devised by those skilled in the art after reading this disclosure and that the scope of the present invention is to be determined by the following claims.
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/942,670, filed 19 Nov. 2007 (now pending), entitled “Determining Authentication Challenge Timing And Type”.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5768503 | Olkin | Jun 1998 | A |
6014085 | Patel | Jan 2000 | A |
6859651 | Gabor | Feb 2005 | B2 |
7024556 | Hadjinikitas et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7120129 | Ayyagari et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7237024 | Toomey | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7577987 | Mizrah | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7805128 | Bentley et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7814324 | Blakley et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7860486 | Frank et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
8009121 | Stuart et al. | Aug 2011 | B1 |
8027665 | Frank | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8370639 | Azar et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8584200 | Frank | Nov 2013 | B2 |
20020152034 | Kondo et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020178359 | Baumeister et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20040006710 | Pollutro et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20050015592 | Lin | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050097320 | Golan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20060015725 | Voice et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060089125 | Frank | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060105744 | Frank | May 2006 | A1 |
20070008937 | Mody et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070250920 | Lindsay | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080046785 | Gilgen et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080146193 | Bentley et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080162338 | Samuels et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080189768 | Callahan et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090007229 | Stokes | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090013381 | Torvinen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090023422 | McInnis et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090183248 | Tuyls et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090198820 | Golla et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Patel, Munjalkumar C., “U.S. Appl. No. 11/942,670 Office Action Feb. 3, 2011”, , Publisher: USPTO, Published in: US. |
Patel, Munjalkumar C., “U.S. Appl. No. 11/942,670 Restriction Requirement Oct. 29, 2010”, , Publisher: USPTO, Published in: US. |
Patel, Munjalkumar C., “U.S. Appl. No. 11/942,670 Office Action May 13, 2011”, , Publisher: USPTO, Published in: US. |
Lee, Jason T., “U.S. Appl. No. 12/241,584 Office Action May 9, 2011”, , Publisher: USPTO, Published in: US. |
Lee, Jason T., “U.S. Appl. No. 12/241,584 Restriction Requirement Feb. 16, 2011”, , Publisher: USPTO, Published in: US. |
Chetty et al , “Audio-visual multimodal fusion for biometric person authentication and liveness verification,” Proceedings of the 2005 NICTA-HCSNet Multimodal User Interaction Workshop, 2006, 78 pages. |
Ratha et al., “Enhancing security and privacy in biometrics-based authentication systems,” IBM Systems Journal, 2001, 21 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090133117 A1 | May 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11942670 | Nov 2007 | US |
Child | 12240912 | US |