đ
Why You Should Turn On Two Factor Authentication - YouTube
Channel: unknown
[0]
In 1981, the President of the United States,
Ronald Reagan,
[3]
was shot by a gunman in Washington DC.
[6]
It wasnât fatal, but it was close.
[8]
Reagan was rushed to hospital and in the chaos,
the Biscuit went missing.
[13]
The Biscuit was the nickname given to a small
plastic card, sealed inside an opaque case,
[17]
that contained the secret codes that would
identify the President over the phone if he
[21]
gave the instruction to fire a nuclear weapon.
[25]
The card was eventually found.
[26]
Some reports say it had been hastily stuffed
in the Presidentâs shoe when
[29]
the trauma team cut away his clothes.
[31]
Others say that the FBI had seized all those
clothes, and the card, as evidence,
[35]
and they didnât give it back until
a couple of days later.
[38]
Itâs possible that both are true,
depending on the timing.
[42]
Now, there are some overexcited people who will
say that for however long that card was missing,
[47]
it would have been impossible for the United States
to launch or to reply to a nuclear exchange.
[53]
Thatâs not true, the Vice President
had a backup, but in 1981,
[57]
in the middle of the Cold War,
[59]
a President with lost nuclear codes added
some instability that the world really didnât need.
[66]
This story has something to do with your phone,
I promise.
[72]
There are three ways that a computer,
or any system, can identify you.
[76]
It can ask for something you know,
something you are, or something you have.
[81]
Those are the three âfactorsâ of authentication.
[83]
And the gold standard for checking identity
is multi-factor authentication.
[88]
At least two of these different factors.
[90]
Two different passwords arenât much better
than one.
[93]
But two factors are.
[96]
When you do something as simple as withdrawing
cash from an ATM,
[99]
that is two-factor authentication:
[101]
the something you have is your card,
[103]
and the something you know is your PIN.
[105]
So letâs look at each of these factors.
[108]
For something you know. Well, for that,
these days, thatâs a password.
[113]
The traditional login system,
username and password,
[115]
is usually credited to Dr Fernando CorbatĂł
at MIT in the 1960s.
[120]
And when the only input device to your computer
is a keyboard,
[124]
a password absolutely makes sense.
[127]
Something you know could also be a PIN,
which is just a short password,
[131]
or in the days before computers, your signature.
[134]
But using this one factor isnât ideal.
[136]
Signatures can be forged.
[138]
Passwords can be leaked or intercepted,
[140]
either by someone hacking into the server
theyâre stored on,
[142]
or putting a keylogger on your computer,
[144]
or just by someone looking over your shoulder
while you type.
[148]
I actually taught myself to shoulder-surf
passwords when I was high school.
[152]
Learned a teacherâs password.
[154]
Got in trouble for it.
[155]
And the only reason that I got caught,
the only reason,
[158]
is because I told someone else
that I'd done it.
[161]
I didnât even want to do anything
with the password,
[163]
I was just the sort of nerd who taught himself
skills like that for fun, 'cos I could.
[168]
And the lesson I learned was not
âdonât do itâ,
[170]
it was âkeep your mouth shutâ.
[172]
Anyway. Passwords.
[174]
Not ideal, but reasonable in the absence of
any other options.
[178]
What about the next factor:
something you are?
[182]
That would be âbiometricsâ.
[184]
Things like fingerprint and face recognition.
[186]
These are great for proving who a person is,
[189]
and theyâre difficult to intercept.
[191]
Although they do have downsides:
[193]
the system has to trust that the device thatâs
reading the print or checking the face hasnât
[197]
been compromised.
[199]
And if your fingerprint gets leaked,
[201]
because some high-tech spy took a copy of
it from a glass you drank from,
[206]
you canât exactly change it.
[208]
I tried once.
[209]
Plus, you can pretend not to know a password.
[212]
That doesnât work for your own face.
[214]
Some people do say there is a fourth factor
of authentication, âsomewhere you areâ,
[219]
the idea that if your credit card transactions
suddenly move to the other side of the globe,
[223]
it might be worth checking whatâs going on,
[225]
but Iâd say that gets rolled into
âsomething you areâ.
[229]
Science fiction writers have also imagined
complicated artificial intelligence systems
[234]
that can learn someoneâs behaviour patterns
over time and recognise them,
[238]
or panopticon societies where privacy is a
thing of the past and
[241]
everyone knows where everyone is and what
they're doing, all the time.
[244]
But right now, for âsomething you areâ:
[247]
weâre basically stuck with fingerprints and faces.
[250]
So how about the third factor:
something you have?
[254]
That would be your bank card, or your phone,
or a literal key.
[259]
Which is ideal if youâre in the same physical
location, if you are unlocking a door:
[264]
but how do you prove that someone has a physical
object when theyâre in a completely different location?
[270]
That was a lot more difficult before smartphones.
[273]
British banks have been sending out card readers
to their customers for many years:
[277]
you plug in your card,
it reads a secret code off the chip,
[280]
and then you type in your PIN and a one-time
code that your bank sends you for each transaction.
[285]
And it mashes all those together,
does a lot of maths,
[287]
and the result is a number that you send
back to your bank,
[290]
confirming that you have the physical card.
[294]
But these days, often you donât need all
that fuss:
[297]
because almost everyone carries a phone now,
[299]
and thatâs a physical thing that can work
as a token just by sending a notification
[303]
to an app on it. Thatâs often secure enough.
[306]
Sometimes thatâs still done with numbers
in text messages,
[309]
but thatâs not ideal: SMS is not secure,
[312]
and there have been attacks where criminals
have called up phone providers and convinced
[317]
the provider to move someoneâs number
over to another phone that the criminal controls.
[322]
Or you can use an authenticator
app on your phone.
[325]
Now, that generates one-time codes.
[327]
When you set up that app,
it stores a long secret code from the server:
[330]
then it combines that with the current time,
[332]
and every minute, you get a different six-digit number
that you can type in,
[336]
to prove that you have that phone.
[339]
Itâs basically a password that your phone
knows, but you donât.
[342]
The codes you type in can be short because
they only last a minute each.
[346]
Of course, if youâre not actually talking
to your bank,
[349]
you're talking to some phishing web site thatâs just
taking the number you give them
[353]
and passing it on to the bank
pretending to be youâŠ
[356]
thatâs not ideal.
[358]
So some really high-security companies use
a small physical USB or Bluetooth token instead.
[363]
Google gave those out to all their employees,
[366]
and they claim it reduced the number of successful
phishing attacks to zero.
[371]
The actual process of how it works is way
beyond the scope of this video,
[374]
but itâs basically equivalent to the
bank card reader,
[376]
only automatic and with a lot more complicated
maths going on behind the scenes to make sure
[381]
that the key will only talk directly to the
correct web server.
[384]
And because thereâs nothing
for you to type in,
[386]
you canât accidentally give the code to
someone else.
[388]
Youâre required to have
the actual, physical token.
[393]
Those US nuclear codes use
all three factors of authentication.
[398]
Something you have: the biscuit, the actual
code card.
[401]
Something you know: there were fake codes
printed on that card,
[403]
so the President had to memorise the position
of the correct one
[406]
so that when he cracked open the card --
hopefully he'd never have to, but
[409]
when we cracked open the card
heâd know which one to read out.
[412]
And something you are:
[413]
he had to be surrounded by the security apparatus
and top-secret infrastructure
[417]
that would let him make the call to the military
in the first place.
[421]
Of course, all that multi-factor authentication
could only check
[424]
that it really was the President
giving the order:
[427]
that the identity was correct.
[429]
There was no way to check that the President
was sane,
[432]
or that he wasnât being coerced or tricked.
[434]
And in the same way,
[436]
you can have all the multi-factor authentication
you want on your bank account and email.
[440]
And you should. You should turn that on.
[442]
You should go to your email provider and your bank
and turn on two-factor authentication
[446]
for all your important accounts.
But it wonât help if
[450]
the company that youâre
sending money to has been hacked,
[452]
and the payment details theyâve emailed you
actually come from a scammer.
[456]
It wonât stop you falling for a confidence
trick or a multi-level marketing scheme.
[459]
Computers can only do what you say.
They canât do what you mean,
[464]
and they canât stop you from asking for
terrible things.
[468]
But at least they can be reasonably sure that
itâs you asking.
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage





