Vulnerability Analysis and Security Assessment of Secure Keyboard Software to Prevent PS/2 Interface Keyboard Sniffing

Abstract

Online security threats have arisen through Internet banking hacking cases, and highly sensitive user information such as the ID, password, account number, and account password that is used for online payments has become vulnerable. Many security companies have therefore researched protection methods regarding keyboard-entered data for the introduction of defense techniques. Recently, keyboard security issues have arisen due to the production of new malicious codes by attackers who have combined the existing attack techniques with new attack techniques; however, a keyboard security assessment is insufficient here. The research motivation is to serve more secure user authentication methods by evaluating the security of information input from the keyboard device for the user authentication, including Internet banking service. If the authentication information input from the keyboard device is exposed during user authentication, attackers can attempt to illegal login or, worst, steal the victim’s money. Accordingly, in this paper, the existing and the new keyboard-attack techniques that are known are surveyed, and the results are used as the basis for the implementation of sample malicious codes to verify both a security analysis and an assessment of secure keyboard software. As a result of the experiment, if the resend command utilization attack technique is used, 7 out of 10 companies’ products expose keyboard information, and only 1 company’s products detect it. The fundamental reason for these vulnerabilities is that the hardware chip related to the PS/2 interface keyboard does not provide security facilities. Therefore, since keyboard data exposure does not be prevented only by software, it is required to develop a hardware chip that provides security facilities.

Keyboard Data Protection Technique Using GAN in Password-Based User Authentication: Based on C/D Bit Vulnerability

“…In the early days of computer development, the CPU performed all input and output processes on its own. However, for performance efficiency, the CPU was improved to prepare a separate interrupt table and handler and process it based on the prepared routine when an interrupt occurs [ 13 ]. Here, to efficiently handle interrupts, the tables and handlers prepared in advance were named interrupt table (IDT, Interrupt Descriptor Table), interrupt routine (ISR, Interrupt Service Routine), and interrupt handler, respectively.…”

“…In the early days of computer development, the CPU performed all input and output processes on its own. However, for performance efficiency, the CPU was improved to prepare a separate interrupt table and handler and process it based on the prepared routine when an interrupt occurs [13]. Here, to efficiently handle interrupts, the The keyboard is an external input device that transfers the scan code corresponding to the key matrix inputted by the user to the CPU through the system bus, and the keyboard data is processed as an interrupt [12].…”

A Deep-Learning-Based Approach to Keystroke-Injection Payload Generation

“…Other researchers proposed a USB-based attacks taxonomy with a more granular approach by creating different bases that cover adversary intentions, object of impact, attack mechanism, level of secrecy, level of complexity, assets, and so forth [12]. A recent study discusses attacks on keyboard-firmware attacks in the banking sector, where vulnerable software inside keyboard controllers is used to sniff sensitive data [13]. As follows, this highlighted the need for secure USB protocols and firmware-verification mechanisms.…”