RE: Defeating Citibank Virtual Keyboard protection using screens
> But your point above:
> "without installing malware on the victim host"
>
> Although true on some level, is bogus for the purpose of
> this work, as it being written makes an automatic
> assumption on working only after malware is installed.
The principle of "defence in depth" is that each security
measure adds to overall security by providing protections that
continue to operate even if other defences have been breached.
The demonstration that Citibank's "security measure" can be
relied upon ONLY in the case where no other breach has allowed
malware to be installed on the client machine is thus a proof
by example that it does not actually provide such defence in
depth, and in fact for far too many end users cannot be safely
assumed to provide any security at all.
It turns out that any security it is alleged to provide is
entirely dependent on the effectiveness of other security
measures already in place.
A "security feature" that only delivers security IF you are
already secure sounds like a good candidate for Schneier's
doghouse.
David Gillett
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 9 之 15 篇)：