Vincent Gable’s Blog

May 26, 2009

Secret Questions Are a Bad Idea

Filed under: Design,Quotes,Security,Usability | , , ,
― Vincent Gable on May 26, 2009

Secret questions are an easier way for someone to hack your account. I don’t see that they offer much over asking people to pick an insecurely convenient password.

Here’s some data on how insecure secret questions are,

Acquaintance with whom participants reported being unwilling to share their webmail passwords were able to guess 17% of their answers (to “secret” questions). Participants forgot 20% of their own answers within six months. What’s more, 13% of answers could be guessed within five attempts by guessing the most popular answers of other participants, though this weakness is partially attributable to the geographic homogeneity of our participant pool.


It’s no secret: Measuring the security and reliability of authentication via ‘secret’ questions
, Stuart Schechter, A. J. Bernheim Brush, Serge Egelman, 17 May 2009

(Via Bruce Schneier)

It’s important to note that people often forget answers to their own secret questions. Anecdotally, I’ve had to call my bank twice because I forgot exactly how I typed in my answers.

Forgetting the answer to a secret question can be embarrassing, unlike forgetting a password. I once got my mother’s maiden name wrong repeatedly. It was pretty awkward. (A credit card was also in my mother’s name, so when they asked “for my mother’s maiden name” they really meant her mother’s maiden name.)

I don’t know of any statistics on how often accounts are compromised by secret questions. But there have been high-profile cases, like Sarah Palin’s email,

…the Palin hack didn’t require any real skill. Instead, the hacker simply reset Palin’s password using her birthdate, ZIP code and information about where she met her spouse — the security question on her Yahoo account, which was answered (Wasilla High) by a simple Google search.

Bruce Schneier says, “Passwords have reached the end of their useful life. Today, they only work for low-security applications. The secret question is just one manifestation of that fact.” If you must use password authentication, then don’t weaken it further with a questionable back door.

March 25, 2009

Crazy Idea: Using iPhones During Interviews

Filed under: Uncategorized | , , ,
― Vincent Gable on March 25, 2009

Using an iPhone as a resource during a job interview is an idea worth considering. An iPhone can google answers to trivial questions Unlike a laptop, it can be used while people face each other, and it’s small enough not to obscure someone. Additionally, it can’t compile and test code, so candidates must still think everything through in their head.

Adding technology to an interview, just because it’s technology, is a bad idea for exactly the same reasons that just putting computers in a classroom isn’t helpful without special curriculum.

But since an iPhone is so unobtrusive, I think it’s uses are worth considering.

In technical interviews, it’s very common for the interviewee to have a question about an API or other detail. The standard practice is for them to agree with the interviewer on an assumed answer and run with it. This works. But it might be interesting to have the real answer available.

Another open question is if google-fu is something that should be tested during an interview. If so, an iPhone might be one way to do it.

Do you have an idea for incorporating some technology into a face-to-face interview?

February 9, 2009

Google Monoculture

Filed under: Announcement | , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 9, 2009

Jeff Atwood remarked,

Google delivers 350x the traffic to Stack Overflow that the next best so-called “search engine” does. Three hundred and fifty times!

All I can say is that’s a Belgium big number!

Here’s his data:

Search Engine Visits
Google 3,417,919
Yahoo 9,779
Live 5,638
Search 2,961
AOL 1,274
Ask 1,186
MSN 1,177
Altavista 202
Yandex 191
Seznam 103

The server logs for vgable.com, for 2008, show google giving me a much more modest 3.6x of my traffic.

13 different refering search engines Pages Percent Hits Percent
Google 3039 72.8 % 3047 72.3 %
Windows Live 1055 25.3 % 1055 25 %
Google (Images) 40 0.9 % 41 0.9 %
Yahoo! 12 0.2 % 12 0.2 %
MSN Search 7 0.1 % 7 0.1 %
Unknown search engines 4 0 % 4 0 %
Google (cache) 3 0 % 35 0.8 %
Scroogle 3 0 % 3 0 %
del.icio.us (Social Bookmark) 2 0 % 2 0 %
AOL 1 0 % 1 0 %
Clusty 1 0 % 1 0 %
Dogpile 1 0 % 1 0 %
AltaVista 1 0 % 1 0 %

Of course, having 3.6x as much market share as everyone else combined is still market domination.

I can’t speculate why the numbers for my niche website are different from Attwood’s niche website (especially w.r.t Live Search).

But Yahoo’s consistently irrelevant 0.3% and 0.2% of referrals looks especially bad for them. Google has too few competitors.

Powered by WordPress