![]() ![]() Headless browsers such as PhantomJS can be easily identified by the JavaScript calls they use. Apply strict rate limits and block or ban IPs with suspicious behavior. This traffic is almost certainly bot traffic and should be treated much more carefully than regular user traffic. It is easy to identify traffic originating from Amazon Web Services or other commercial data centers. Rate-Limit Non-Residential Traffic Sources You can monitor the last several IPs that were used to log into a specific account and compare them to the suspected bad IP, to reduce false positives. A common fingerprint combination is an Operating System + Geolocation + Language.Īttackers will typically have a limited pool of IP addresses, so another effective defense is to block or sandbox IPs that attempt to log into multiple accounts. To capture more attacks, you can use a combination of 2-3 common parameters, and enforce less severe measures like a temporary ban. If you use a strict fingerprint with multiple parameters, you can enforce more severe measures, like banning the IP. If the same combination of parameters logged in several times in sequence, it is likely to be a brute force or credential stuffing attack. The fingerprint is a combination of parameters like operating system, language, browser, time zone, user agent, etc. Like MFA, CAPTCHA can be combined with other methods and applied only in specific scenarios.ĭevice FingerprintingYou can use JavaScript to collect information about user devices and create a “fingerprint” for each incoming session. However, hackers can easily bypass CAPTCHA by using headless browsers. If so, it can be combined with other techniques, for example, MFA can be applied only in combination with device fingerprinting.ĬAPTCHA, which requires users to perform an action to prove they are human, can reduce the effectiveness of credential stuffing. ![]() In many cases, it is not feasible to require multi-factor authentication for an entire user base. Attacker bots will not be able to provide a physical authentication method, such as a mobile phone or access token. Requiring users to authenticate with something they have, in addition to something they know, is the best defense against credential stuffing. The following measures can help you protect your website from credential stuffing attacks. Retains account information for future use, for example, phishing attacks or other transactions enabled by the compromised service.Ĭredential stuffing attack example Credential Stuffing Prevention.Monitors for successful logins and obtains personally identifiable information, credit cards or other valuable data from the compromised accounts.By running the process in parallel across multiple sites, reducing the need to repeatedly log into a single service. Runs an automated process to check if stolen credentials work on many websites.Sets up a bot that is able to automatically log into multiple user accounts in parallel, while faking different IP addresses.Here is a typical process followed by an attacker in a large-scale credential stuffing attack. The reason is that even if you enforce strong passwords, users may share that password across services, leading to a compromise. In a modern web application with basic security measures in place, brute force attacks are likely to fail, while credential stuffing attacks can succeed. Brute force attacks lack context and data from previous breaches, and so their login success rate is much lower.Brute force attacks succeed if users choose simple, guessable passwords.Brute force attacks try to guess credentials with no context, using random strings, commonly used password patterns or dictionaries of common phrases.Brute Force AttacksĬredential stuffing is similar to a brute force attack, but there are several important differences: These bots can often circumvent simple security measures like banning IP addresses with too many failed logins.Ĭredential Stuffing vs. More sophisticated bots that simultaneously attempt several logins, and appear to originate from different IP addresses.Broad availability of massive databases of breach credentials, for example, “Collection #1-5” which made 22 billion username and password combinations openly available in plaintext to the hacker community.Statistics show that about 0.1% of breached credentials attempted on another service will result in a successful login.Ĭredential stuffing is a rising threat vector for two main reasons: ![]() The attack uses bots for automation and scale and is based on the assumption that many users reuse usernames and passwords across multiple services. Credential stuffing is a cyberattack method in which attackers use lists of compromised user credentials to breach into a system. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |