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 wasn’t 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 President’s 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 didn’t give it back until a couple of days later.
[38]
It’s 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]
That’s 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 didn’t 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 ‘factors’ 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 aren’t 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 let’s look at each of these factors.
[108]
For something you know. Well, for that, these days, that’s 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 isn’t ideal.
[136]
Signatures can be forged.
[138]
Passwords can be leaked or intercepted,
[140]
either by someone hacking into the server they’re 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 teacher’s 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 didn’t 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 “don’t do it”,
[170]
it was “keep your mouth shut”.
[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 “biometrics”.
[184]
Things like fingerprint and face recognition.
[186]
These are great for proving who a person is,
[189]
and they’re difficult to intercept.
[191]
Although they do have downsides:
[193]
the system has to trust that the device that’s reading the print or checking the face hasn’t
[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 can’t exactly change it.
[208]
I tried once.
[209]
Plus, you can pretend not to know a password.
[212]
That doesn’t work for your own face.
[214]
Some people do say there is a fourth factor of authentication, “somewhere you are”,
[219]
the idea that if your credit card transactions suddenly move to the other side of the globe,
[223]
it might be worth checking what’s going on,
[225]
but I’d say that gets rolled into “something you are”.
[229]
Science fiction writers have also imagined complicated artificial intelligence systems
[234]
that can learn someone’s 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 “something you are”:
[247]
we’re 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 you’re in the same physical location, if you are unlocking a door:
[264]
but how do you prove that someone has a physical object when they’re 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 don’t need all that fuss:
[297]
because almost everyone carries a phone now,
[299]
and that’s a physical thing that can work as a token just by sending a notification
[303]
to an app on it. That’s often secure enough.
[306]
Sometimes that’s still done with numbers in text messages,
[309]
but that’s 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 someone’s 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]
It’s basically a password that your phone knows, but you don’t.
[342]
The codes you type in can be short because they only last a minute each.
[346]
Of course, if you’re not actually talking to your bank,
[349]
you're talking to some phishing web site that’s just taking the number you give them
[353]
and passing it on to the bank pretending to be you

[356]
that’s 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 it’s 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 there’s nothing for you to type in,
[386]
you can’t accidentally give the code to someone else.
[388]
You’re 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 he’d 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 wasn’t 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 won’t help if
[450]
the company that you’re sending money to has been hacked,
[452]
and the payment details they’ve emailed you actually come from a scammer.
[456]
It won’t stop you falling for a confidence trick or a multi-level marketing scheme.
[459]
Computers can only do what you say. They can’t do what you mean,
[464]
and they can’t stop you from asking for terrible things.
[468]
But at least they can be reasonably sure that it’s you asking.