Selecting a secure PIN for building access
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
What are the general criteria for rejecting an insecure PIN to access a building?
There has been a lot of discussion about password selection security. Minimum length requirements, mandatory classes of characters, etc. I have not found much concerning PIN selection security. Furthermore, there are several types of access that a PIN protects (phone, credit card, building). Each may have their own particular vulnerability characteristics.
I am in the loop on the installation of a new security system which allows personnel to enter a building by entering a PIN on a keypad by the door. Individuals are allowed to select their own PIN which is entered into the system under their name. I am aware of some insecure PINs, such as 12345 (or any consecutive digits sequence), the location's zip code or part of the company's phone number or address.
Anyone with a legitimate need may request access to the building. This includes everyone from executives to employees and and perhaps occasionally, guests. This particular building is a church, so there are no national secrets to protect. I would characterize the security requirements to be similar to a house. Interior offices are protected with physical keys.
passwords physical-access
add a comment |
What are the general criteria for rejecting an insecure PIN to access a building?
There has been a lot of discussion about password selection security. Minimum length requirements, mandatory classes of characters, etc. I have not found much concerning PIN selection security. Furthermore, there are several types of access that a PIN protects (phone, credit card, building). Each may have their own particular vulnerability characteristics.
I am in the loop on the installation of a new security system which allows personnel to enter a building by entering a PIN on a keypad by the door. Individuals are allowed to select their own PIN which is entered into the system under their name. I am aware of some insecure PINs, such as 12345 (or any consecutive digits sequence), the location's zip code or part of the company's phone number or address.
Anyone with a legitimate need may request access to the building. This includes everyone from executives to employees and and perhaps occasionally, guests. This particular building is a church, so there are no national secrets to protect. I would characterize the security requirements to be similar to a house. Interior offices are protected with physical keys.
passwords physical-access
1
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago
add a comment |
What are the general criteria for rejecting an insecure PIN to access a building?
There has been a lot of discussion about password selection security. Minimum length requirements, mandatory classes of characters, etc. I have not found much concerning PIN selection security. Furthermore, there are several types of access that a PIN protects (phone, credit card, building). Each may have their own particular vulnerability characteristics.
I am in the loop on the installation of a new security system which allows personnel to enter a building by entering a PIN on a keypad by the door. Individuals are allowed to select their own PIN which is entered into the system under their name. I am aware of some insecure PINs, such as 12345 (or any consecutive digits sequence), the location's zip code or part of the company's phone number or address.
Anyone with a legitimate need may request access to the building. This includes everyone from executives to employees and and perhaps occasionally, guests. This particular building is a church, so there are no national secrets to protect. I would characterize the security requirements to be similar to a house. Interior offices are protected with physical keys.
passwords physical-access
What are the general criteria for rejecting an insecure PIN to access a building?
There has been a lot of discussion about password selection security. Minimum length requirements, mandatory classes of characters, etc. I have not found much concerning PIN selection security. Furthermore, there are several types of access that a PIN protects (phone, credit card, building). Each may have their own particular vulnerability characteristics.
I am in the loop on the installation of a new security system which allows personnel to enter a building by entering a PIN on a keypad by the door. Individuals are allowed to select their own PIN which is entered into the system under their name. I am aware of some insecure PINs, such as 12345 (or any consecutive digits sequence), the location's zip code or part of the company's phone number or address.
Anyone with a legitimate need may request access to the building. This includes everyone from executives to employees and and perhaps occasionally, guests. This particular building is a church, so there are no national secrets to protect. I would characterize the security requirements to be similar to a house. Interior offices are protected with physical keys.
passwords physical-access
passwords physical-access
edited 27 mins ago
Les
asked 39 mins ago
LesLes
1517
1517
1
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago
add a comment |
1
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago
1
1
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
There are only 100000 potential values if you have a 5 digit PIN. That means that a single PIN can be brute forced in a relatively small length of time, unless there is some form of secondary restriction against a person standing next to the door and trying each number. This gets worse if there are multiple people with distinct codes for access to the system - assuming each person selects a random code, it'll only take n/100000 tries on average to find a working code, where n is the number of people with access.
It would probably be reasonable to expect a dedicated attacker to manage 1000 tries per hour - it doesn't take very long to type a 5 digit number. That would give an upper bound of 100 hours, with a single code. That's 3 (pretty boring) weekends with some breaks for food, which, depending on what is in the building, may well be worth it. The system as described can't implement account lockout - the only way to determine which user is trying to access is through the code.
So, how to solve this?
- Use the PIN as a secondary factor - have an access card, and a PIN, for example. It is then possible to have account lockout after some failed PIN entries.
- Enforce limits on the PIN in other ways - have someone guarding the door who prevents too many tries, have a CCTV camera pointing at the door which is monitored for unusual activity (someone standing there trying each possible code)
- Have a much longer PIN, making it impractical to keep trying codes
You would also probably want to ensure that the codes being entered cannot be monitored in other ways - for example, by pointing a video camera at the key pad.
add a comment |
PINs are usually accompanied by some other authentication factor, like biometrics or a physical token. So, the PIN is not a lone factor in authentication.
You appear to describe a situation where people can gain access to a secured building by punching in a code. Let me rephrase that: by using static, difficult to change information that can be easily copied and shared, the public gains access to the inside of your building.
The control against that threat is to make it very difficult to record and guess or use the physical appearance of the pin pad to deduce the code. That means making the PINs long and putting physical controls in place to make recording more difficult and to place layers of additional authentication protection on the inside of the building.
Because you are asking about the rejection process, my suggestion would be to use a random number generator instead of people choosing their own, and make it long. This bypasses people choosing PIN pad patterns or other pattern-based PINs which can be easy to guess or observe.
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "162"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209212%2fselecting-a-secure-pin-for-building-access%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There are only 100000 potential values if you have a 5 digit PIN. That means that a single PIN can be brute forced in a relatively small length of time, unless there is some form of secondary restriction against a person standing next to the door and trying each number. This gets worse if there are multiple people with distinct codes for access to the system - assuming each person selects a random code, it'll only take n/100000 tries on average to find a working code, where n is the number of people with access.
It would probably be reasonable to expect a dedicated attacker to manage 1000 tries per hour - it doesn't take very long to type a 5 digit number. That would give an upper bound of 100 hours, with a single code. That's 3 (pretty boring) weekends with some breaks for food, which, depending on what is in the building, may well be worth it. The system as described can't implement account lockout - the only way to determine which user is trying to access is through the code.
So, how to solve this?
- Use the PIN as a secondary factor - have an access card, and a PIN, for example. It is then possible to have account lockout after some failed PIN entries.
- Enforce limits on the PIN in other ways - have someone guarding the door who prevents too many tries, have a CCTV camera pointing at the door which is monitored for unusual activity (someone standing there trying each possible code)
- Have a much longer PIN, making it impractical to keep trying codes
You would also probably want to ensure that the codes being entered cannot be monitored in other ways - for example, by pointing a video camera at the key pad.
add a comment |
There are only 100000 potential values if you have a 5 digit PIN. That means that a single PIN can be brute forced in a relatively small length of time, unless there is some form of secondary restriction against a person standing next to the door and trying each number. This gets worse if there are multiple people with distinct codes for access to the system - assuming each person selects a random code, it'll only take n/100000 tries on average to find a working code, where n is the number of people with access.
It would probably be reasonable to expect a dedicated attacker to manage 1000 tries per hour - it doesn't take very long to type a 5 digit number. That would give an upper bound of 100 hours, with a single code. That's 3 (pretty boring) weekends with some breaks for food, which, depending on what is in the building, may well be worth it. The system as described can't implement account lockout - the only way to determine which user is trying to access is through the code.
So, how to solve this?
- Use the PIN as a secondary factor - have an access card, and a PIN, for example. It is then possible to have account lockout after some failed PIN entries.
- Enforce limits on the PIN in other ways - have someone guarding the door who prevents too many tries, have a CCTV camera pointing at the door which is monitored for unusual activity (someone standing there trying each possible code)
- Have a much longer PIN, making it impractical to keep trying codes
You would also probably want to ensure that the codes being entered cannot be monitored in other ways - for example, by pointing a video camera at the key pad.
add a comment |
There are only 100000 potential values if you have a 5 digit PIN. That means that a single PIN can be brute forced in a relatively small length of time, unless there is some form of secondary restriction against a person standing next to the door and trying each number. This gets worse if there are multiple people with distinct codes for access to the system - assuming each person selects a random code, it'll only take n/100000 tries on average to find a working code, where n is the number of people with access.
It would probably be reasonable to expect a dedicated attacker to manage 1000 tries per hour - it doesn't take very long to type a 5 digit number. That would give an upper bound of 100 hours, with a single code. That's 3 (pretty boring) weekends with some breaks for food, which, depending on what is in the building, may well be worth it. The system as described can't implement account lockout - the only way to determine which user is trying to access is through the code.
So, how to solve this?
- Use the PIN as a secondary factor - have an access card, and a PIN, for example. It is then possible to have account lockout after some failed PIN entries.
- Enforce limits on the PIN in other ways - have someone guarding the door who prevents too many tries, have a CCTV camera pointing at the door which is monitored for unusual activity (someone standing there trying each possible code)
- Have a much longer PIN, making it impractical to keep trying codes
You would also probably want to ensure that the codes being entered cannot be monitored in other ways - for example, by pointing a video camera at the key pad.
There are only 100000 potential values if you have a 5 digit PIN. That means that a single PIN can be brute forced in a relatively small length of time, unless there is some form of secondary restriction against a person standing next to the door and trying each number. This gets worse if there are multiple people with distinct codes for access to the system - assuming each person selects a random code, it'll only take n/100000 tries on average to find a working code, where n is the number of people with access.
It would probably be reasonable to expect a dedicated attacker to manage 1000 tries per hour - it doesn't take very long to type a 5 digit number. That would give an upper bound of 100 hours, with a single code. That's 3 (pretty boring) weekends with some breaks for food, which, depending on what is in the building, may well be worth it. The system as described can't implement account lockout - the only way to determine which user is trying to access is through the code.
So, how to solve this?
- Use the PIN as a secondary factor - have an access card, and a PIN, for example. It is then possible to have account lockout after some failed PIN entries.
- Enforce limits on the PIN in other ways - have someone guarding the door who prevents too many tries, have a CCTV camera pointing at the door which is monitored for unusual activity (someone standing there trying each possible code)
- Have a much longer PIN, making it impractical to keep trying codes
You would also probably want to ensure that the codes being entered cannot be monitored in other ways - for example, by pointing a video camera at the key pad.
answered 18 mins ago
MatthewMatthew
25.3k78193
25.3k78193
add a comment |
add a comment |
PINs are usually accompanied by some other authentication factor, like biometrics or a physical token. So, the PIN is not a lone factor in authentication.
You appear to describe a situation where people can gain access to a secured building by punching in a code. Let me rephrase that: by using static, difficult to change information that can be easily copied and shared, the public gains access to the inside of your building.
The control against that threat is to make it very difficult to record and guess or use the physical appearance of the pin pad to deduce the code. That means making the PINs long and putting physical controls in place to make recording more difficult and to place layers of additional authentication protection on the inside of the building.
Because you are asking about the rejection process, my suggestion would be to use a random number generator instead of people choosing their own, and make it long. This bypasses people choosing PIN pad patterns or other pattern-based PINs which can be easy to guess or observe.
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
add a comment |
PINs are usually accompanied by some other authentication factor, like biometrics or a physical token. So, the PIN is not a lone factor in authentication.
You appear to describe a situation where people can gain access to a secured building by punching in a code. Let me rephrase that: by using static, difficult to change information that can be easily copied and shared, the public gains access to the inside of your building.
The control against that threat is to make it very difficult to record and guess or use the physical appearance of the pin pad to deduce the code. That means making the PINs long and putting physical controls in place to make recording more difficult and to place layers of additional authentication protection on the inside of the building.
Because you are asking about the rejection process, my suggestion would be to use a random number generator instead of people choosing their own, and make it long. This bypasses people choosing PIN pad patterns or other pattern-based PINs which can be easy to guess or observe.
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
add a comment |
PINs are usually accompanied by some other authentication factor, like biometrics or a physical token. So, the PIN is not a lone factor in authentication.
You appear to describe a situation where people can gain access to a secured building by punching in a code. Let me rephrase that: by using static, difficult to change information that can be easily copied and shared, the public gains access to the inside of your building.
The control against that threat is to make it very difficult to record and guess or use the physical appearance of the pin pad to deduce the code. That means making the PINs long and putting physical controls in place to make recording more difficult and to place layers of additional authentication protection on the inside of the building.
Because you are asking about the rejection process, my suggestion would be to use a random number generator instead of people choosing their own, and make it long. This bypasses people choosing PIN pad patterns or other pattern-based PINs which can be easy to guess or observe.
PINs are usually accompanied by some other authentication factor, like biometrics or a physical token. So, the PIN is not a lone factor in authentication.
You appear to describe a situation where people can gain access to a secured building by punching in a code. Let me rephrase that: by using static, difficult to change information that can be easily copied and shared, the public gains access to the inside of your building.
The control against that threat is to make it very difficult to record and guess or use the physical appearance of the pin pad to deduce the code. That means making the PINs long and putting physical controls in place to make recording more difficult and to place layers of additional authentication protection on the inside of the building.
Because you are asking about the rejection process, my suggestion would be to use a random number generator instead of people choosing their own, and make it long. This bypasses people choosing PIN pad patterns or other pattern-based PINs which can be easy to guess or observe.
edited 16 mins ago
answered 28 mins ago
schroeder♦schroeder
79.6k30177213
79.6k30177213
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
add a comment |
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
2
2
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
"additional authentication protection" examples could be welcome (RFID badge, classic key, etc.)
– A. Hersean
25 mins ago
1
1
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
@A.Hersean or more strong physical barriers, cameras, manned security, etc.
– schroeder♦
23 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
Of course longer is better, but I don't think the PIN needs to be very long. I'd say it just doesn't have to be guessed, recorded, or abused. This means 12345 or 00000 would never be allowed, wrong PINs would trigger a notification or action of some sort, the pad should not be able to be viewed or recorded from a distance (it might face a wall), etc.
– reed
16 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
@reed with new info, I have revised the length advise, thanks!
– schroeder♦
15 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Information Security Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsecurity.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209212%2fselecting-a-secure-pin-for-building-access%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
We can make a lot of guesses about the risks that a church might face, but can you describe what you think the risks would be if someone got access to a PIN? Vandalism? Hate crime? Access to church records? Access to valuables? What is in the offices that are behind, likely, hollow core doors? Is it staffed or patrolled 24/7?
– schroeder♦
24 mins ago
You list several risks. The primary risk we would like to reduce is vandalism and theft. BTW, thanks for adding the physical-access tag.
– Les
21 mins ago
Cameras? Patrols? Manned security?
– schroeder♦
18 mins ago