IMPAIRED-USER INPUT SCENARIOS FOR KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Touch-Screen Mobile- Device Data Collection for Biometrics Studies W. Ciaurro, B. Major, D. Martinez, D. Panchal, G. Perez, M. Rana, R. Rana, R. Reyes,
Advertisements

Teacher-Administered Testlets
EXAMS: WHAT ARE THEY REALLY GOOD FOR, ANYWAY?. What professors say about exams. What students hear about exams.
T EAMS 2 & 4 R ESEARCH D AY P RESENTATION P RESENTERS T EAMS 2 & 4 T HE M ICHAEL L. G ARGANO 9 TH A NNUAL R ESEARCH D AY P RESENTATION P RESENTERS E DYTA.
Long Text Keystroke Biometrics Study Gary Bartolacci, Mary Curtin, Marc Katzenberg, Ngozi Nwana Sung-Hyuk Cha, Charles Tappert (Software Engineering Project.
CS Team 5 Alex Wong Raheel Khan Rumeiz Hasseem Swati Bharati Biometric Authentication System.
Keystroke Biometric Studies Security Research at Pace Keystroke Biometric Drs. Charles Tappert and Allen Stix Seidenberg School of CSIS.
Keystroke Biometric Studies Assignment 2 – Review of the Literature Case Study – Keystroke Biometric Describe problem investigated (intro + abstract) Developed.
Keystroke Biometric Studies Keystroke Biometric Identification and Authentication on Long-Text Input Book chapter in Behavioral Biometrics for Human Identification.
Robert S. Zack, Charles C. Tappert, and Sung-Hyuk Cha Pace University, New York Performance of a Long-Text-Input Keystroke Biometric Authentication System.
Lawson System Foundation 9.0
A NALYZING I MPAIRED -U SER I NPUT S CENARIOS FOR K EYSTROKE B IOMETRIC A UTHENTICATION Gonzalo Perez J. Vinnie Monaco Advisor – Dr. Charles Tappert Friday,
Pattern Recognition: Baysian Decision Theory Charles Tappert Seidenberg School of CSIS, Pace University.
Keystroke Biometric System Client: Dr. Mary Villani Instructor: Dr. Charles Tappert Team 4 Members: Michael Wuench ; Mingfei Bi ; Evelin Urbaez ; Shaji.
User Authentication Using Keystroke Dynamics Jeff Hieb & Kunal Pharas ECE 614 Spring 2005 University of Louisville.
I can be You: Questioning the use of Keystroke Dynamics as Biometrics —Paper by Tey Chee Meng, Payas Gupta, Debin Gao Presented by: Kai Li Department of.
Physical vs. Behavioral Biometrics Focus of the Study Keystroke Biometrics Impaired/ Distracted Research Experiments Conclusion and Contribution to Biometrics.
1 Minimum Bayes-risk Methods in Automatic Speech Recognition Vaibhava Geol And William Byrne IBM ; Johns Hopkins University 2003 by CRC Press LLC 2005/4/26.
Key Stage One Parent Workshop New Curriculum and New Statutory Assessment Tests.
Long-Text Keystroke Biometric Applications over the Internet Gary Bartolacci, Mary Curtin, Marc Katzenberg, Ngozi Nwana, Sung-Hyuk Cha, and Charles Tappert.
Detecting Web Attacks Using Multi-Stage Log Analysis
Human Computer Interaction Lecture 21 User Support
Computer-User-Input Behavioral Biometrics Dr. Charles C
  A preliminary study: Perceptions of aviation maintenance students related to the use of Augmented Reality maintenance instructions Amadou Anne, Yu Wang.
How to Moodle 1.
Keystroke Biometric Studies
Human Computer Interaction Lecture 21,22 User Support
Computer-User-Input Behavioral Biometrics The Biometrics we focus on at Pace University Dr. Charles C. Tappert Seidenberg School of CSIS, Pace University.
DATA INPUT AND OUTPUT.
Keystroke Biometric Studies with Short Numeric Input on Smartphones
Keystroke Biometric Studies with Short Numeric Input on Smartphones
LABEL CORRECTION AND EVENT DETECTION FOR ELECTRICITY DISAGGREGATION
Performance Management
Please sit at the appropriate table with your IC/Principal.
Investigation of Instructions for Password Generation
Lawson System Foundation 9.0
Information and Guidance on the Changes and Expectations for 2016/17
Section 2: Science as a Process
University of Colombo School of Computing, Colombo, Sri Lanka
Psychology as a science
By Innovative Matrix Softech Pvt Ltd
NBKeyboard: An Arm-based Word-gesture keyboard
CIS 524 Possible Is Everything/tutorialrank.com
CIS 524 Education for Service/tutorialrank.com
Speech Database/Tool System And Preliminary Accent study.
KS2 SATS 2018.
Crowd Simulation (INFOMCRWS) - Course Introduction
Keystroke Biometric Studies with Short Numeric Input on Smartphones
Keystroke Biometric Studies with Short Numeric Input on Smartphones
Performance Management
Introduction to Systems Analysis and Design
Computer-User-Input Behavioral Biometrics Dr. Charles C
Instructional Learning Cycle:
Group: Chris, Daniel, Jeff, Kathy, Shirelle, Vincent
Keystroke Biometric System
Validating Student Growth During an Assessment Transition
Multi-Biometrics: Fusing At The Classification Output Level Using Keystroke and Mouse Motion Features Todd Breuer, Paola Garcia Cardenas, Anu George, Hung.
A SEMINAR REPORT ON BIOMETRICS
EER Assurance December 2018
Accessibility Supports Training
Session 16 Written Examination and Program Conclusion
Curriculum Coordinator: D. Para Date of Presentation: Jan. 20, 2017
Accessibility Supports Training
DESIGN OF CRF CRF.
DESIGN OF CRF CRF.
End of Key Stage Two SATs Meeting for Parents
How will my Degree be Classified?
Chapter 9 Test for Independent Means Between-Subjects Design
Computer-User-Input Behavioral Biometrics Dr. Charles C
Keystroke Biometric Studies with Short Numeric Input on Smartphones
Presentation transcript:

IMPAIRED-USER INPUT SCENARIOS FOR KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION ANALYZING IMPAIRED-USER INPUT SCENARIOS FOR KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION Gonzalo Perez J. Vinnie Monaco Advisor – Dr. Charles Tappert Monday, September 17, 2018

KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC RATIONALE According to ROY MAXION a research professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon “MOTIONS THAT ARE PERFORMED NUMEROUS TIMES, ARE GOVERNED BY MOTOR CONTROL, NOT DELIBERATE THOUGHT. THAT IS WHY SUCCESSFULLY MIMICKING KEYSTROKE DYNAMICS IS PHYSIOLOGICALLY IMPROBABLE.”

THE STUDY EXAMINES HOW TO BETTER ANALYZE ABNORMAL TYPING BEHAVIOR FOCUS OF STUDY THE STUDY EXAMINES HOW TO BETTER ANALYZE ABNORMAL TYPING BEHAVIOR IMPAIRED DISTRACTED One-handed, typing behavior may not be performed numerous times and may not necessarily be governed by motor control. One handed typing behavior has been found to be erratic when compared to standard two-handed typing behavior, and this study attempts to shed light as to how to better authenticate distracted or impaired typing scenarios.

OTHER STUDIES TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN KEYSTROKE BIOMETRICS INCLUDE: OVERALL GOAL TO STRENGTHEN CURRENT KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC SYSTEMS BY DEVELOPING A MODEL WHICH WILL ACCOUNT FOR VARIOUS IMPAIRED OR DISTRACTED INPUT SCENARIOS OTHER STUDIES TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN KEYSTROKE BIOMETRICS INCLUDE: Emotion Word Quality Short Structured Tests Arbitrary Long-text Stylometry

OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE 1 OBJECTIVE 2 OBJECTIVE 3 OBJECTIVE 4 To better understand how a keystroke biometric system handles users that have been impaired or distracted Collect data by simulating a quiz to capture arbitrary free-text input from users entering data using various scenarios Run various experiments to determine which model best authenticates users Continuously analyze results from experiments and modify parameters to improve EER’s

IMPAIRED USER REQUIREMENTS BIOMETRIC RATIONALE Research will focus on constrained user input BIOMETRIC SYSTEMS NEED TO CONSIDER USER REQUIREMENTS AS USERS MAY HAVE SOME PHYSIOLOGICAL AND MEDICAL FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE USABILITY AND EFFICIENCY OF BIOMETRICS VISUALLY IMPAIRED SUBJECTS May suffer from Aniridia, absence of an iris Person may be blind Person may have eye tremors HEARING IMPAIRMENTS Subject may not be able to hear instructions that are needed for a biometric system Speech may be affected due to hearing loss

IMPAIRED KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC RATIONALE A traditional keystroke biometric system would require the user to always input keystrokes in a normal state. (using both hands) In a normal setting, users may type using one hand only if they are on the phone or drinking a cup of coffee or perhaps one hand or arm is injured. TO INTRODUCE VARIOUS KEYSTROKE INPUT METHODS IN ORDER TO STRENGTHEN THE VALIDITY OF THE KEYSTROKE BIOMETRIC SYSTEM THE STUDY WILL ANALYZE VARIOUS KEYSTROKE INPUT METHODS TO DETERMINE IF THE USER CAN STILL BE AUTHENTICATED OR PROVIDE A NEW MODEL.

DATA CAPTURE- PARTICIPANTS EXPERIMENT FEATURED 81 STUDENTS WHICH SUCCESSFULLY ENROLLED Entered data as part of a simulated quiz The quiz format encouraged users to enter arbitrary long-text input responses Various scenarios were introduced Both Hand Normal Left Hand Only Right Hand Only

HARDWARE 90% SINCE THE QUIZZES WERE TAKEN TOWARDS THE END OF CLASS SESSION, 90% OF USERS UTILIZED AN HP VMWARE PLATFORM USING A STANDARD HP KEYBOARD Some of the users could not complete the exam in class and had to use their laptop or desktop at home. The system prompts the users to identify which system they were using to enter their keystrokes.

DPS DISSERTATION DATA CAPTURE MOODLE

Every question in each exam was unique MOODLE DPS QUIZ STUDENTS WERE ASKED TO Log into a Moodle learning platform which is an open source alternative from blackboard Complete three exams, each exam asking them to answer five questions related to the content that was being covered in the introductory computer science course Every question in each exam was unique Keystrokes were logged by a JavaScript event logging framework which was embedded into a Moodle learning platform

DATA CAPTURED 81 Users entering at least 100 CHARACTERS for every question in each scenario listed below Both Hands B Left Hand Only L Right Hand Only R

FIRST ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS AFTER CAPTURING THE KEYSTROKES FROM USERS THROUGH VARIOUS NORMAL AND IMPAIRED SCENARIOS, WE BEGAN TO RUN SIMULATIONS: B train – B test B train – L test B train – R test Initially, we were hoping to find decent results with this experiment and fine tune the dataset in order to provide a novel method to authenticate one hand only typing

38% FIRST ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS (cont’d) TABLE 1- FIRST ITERATION RESULTS TRAIN DATA TEST DATA FEATURES EER (%) BOTH Both All 3.3 Left 38.04 Right 38 Our results were not encouraging with this method as B Train, L and R Test gave us EER’s in the upper 38% range. Typing one handed proved significantly alter a user’s typing behavior and as a result gave us very poor EER rates 38%

SECOND ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS SECOND EXPERIMENT L train – L test R train – R test As a result from our initial findings, we realized that one handed typing behavior was SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT than the typing behavior of two handed typing Next we decided to experiment to determine if one handed typing behavior was so erratic, that it would be difficult to authenticate with the same one handed test sample

SECOND ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS (cont’d) TABLE 2- SECOND ITERATION RESULTS TRAIN DATA TEST DATA FEATURES EER% LEFT Left All 13.96 RIGHT Right 15.61 We were pleased to see the results of the single handed train and test data. The EER rates were relatively low, in the mid-teens which concludes that user one handed samples do have a conclusive pattern that can be analyzed and authenticated with a keystroke biometric system with relative efficacy. However, we wanted to try another experiment to determine if we could improve the error rate to a lower number if possible.

THIRD ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS AFTER CAPTURING THE KEYSTROKES FROM USERS THROUGH VARIOUS NORMAL AND IMPAIRED SCENARIOS, WE BEGAN TO RUN SIMULATIONS: B train, L test, L Features B train, R test, R Features L train, L test, L Features R train, R test, R Features With the intent of lowering EER rates further, we wanted to experiment by filtering features which would better authenticate impaired users. We created the feature sets for left/right sides by filtering the linguistics features to those that contain keys on each side of the keyboard

THIRD ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS (cont’d) TABLE 3- THIRD ITERATION RESULTS TRAIN DATA TEST DATA FEATURES EER% BOTH Left 35.85 Right 36.79 LEFT 22.75 RIGHT 26.64 Much to our dismay, the left/right feature filter actually worsened the results of our testing. The initial hypothesis was that if a user is typing with one hand, they would perform more natural typing behavior on the segment of the keyboard with the one hand that they were typing with. Our results did not align with this hypothesis and the reason could be related to omission of the segments. OMITTING A SEGMENT of the keyboard excludes many features of the keylogger system which DEGRADED, not improved the results of the experiment.

FOURTH ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS THE GOAL OF A FOURTH ITERATION WAS TO Combine some of the datasets in order to exclude the need for a system to initiate a detector function and then engage various fallback procedures in order to authenticate a user. Therefore, we combined all of the samples into one experiment which included approximately 1200 DATA POINTS PER USER which needed to be split into 5 SAMPLES. The experiment was so large that it required two days to complete.

FOURTH ITERATION EXPERIMENTS & RESULTS (cont’d) TABLE 3- FOURTH ITERATION RESULTS TRAIN DATA TEST DATA FEATURES EER% BOTH-LEFT-RIGHT Both-left-right All 12.41 Both 4.86 Left 15.82 Right 15.74 The results were very encouraging as the EER’s were with the standard margin of error when comparing the training and testing conditions separately. Fewer assumptions are made with this method The method does require that B, L, R samples be collected during the enrollment phase. System doesn’t need to know whether a sample is one-handed when testing. Avoids requiring a detector and fallback procedure for one-handed samples.

DISCUSSIONS Each iteration provided valuable information which assisted us in expanding and developing the research Initially, we expected to find patterns between the both hand sample and the one handed sample which could have been identified, isolated and matched accordingly One handed samples were too erratic and could not be matched with decent rates using our tools Keyboard segmentation actually worsened results Combining B+L+R, and testing across all scenarios proved to be the best approach that would authenticate users and provide a seamless test implementation process

CONCLUSION 01 The major contribution of this research study was to provide a novel approach to authenticate impaired users of a keystroke biometric system 02 The research is an important step towards creating a more robust keystroke biometric system and is also an essential topic that must be considered when designing any biometric system, albeit physical 03 Furthermore, our novel approach of combining datasets consisting of various scenarios and then subsequently testing across single scenarios can be an approach to consider for other behavioral biometric systems

BIOMETRIC IDENTIFICATION COMPETITION PAPER SUBMITTED TO ICB2015 04 02 Participants competed against each other to obtain the highest classification accuracies and submitted classification results through an online system A paper on one-handed keystroke biometrics which was based from our research was submitted and accepted to the International Conference on Biometrics (ICB 2015) in Phuket, Thailand 01 4 1 Competition participants designed classification models trained on the normally-typed samples in an attempt to classify an unlabeled dataset that consists of normally-typed and one-handed samples We provided our unlabeled dataset and 9 teams from all over the world competed for the top spots 3 2 03

ICB 2015 – Phuket, Thailand