People almost always solve password hassles their own way; usually very early in their use of digital devices. Because their preferred solution is a personal, they’re frequently satisfied and reluctant to change. No one wants to be told a do it yourself project is not sufficient. Beware though, just like with ‘social media security’, a large amount of intentional deception hides the very real vulnerability of online access.
Before addressing the “invented here” issue, let’s take a look at the common offer to a net browser to use their credentials from another web site on a different destination. It seems simply a convenience; no need to create a new log-in. However, as recent congressional hearings revealed, Facebook (and others), interpret this permission to re-use a registered username and password as carte blanche to acquire every keystroke on the new site. It’s not even as insidious as Facebook’s infamous ‘ghost profile’. It’s a trade: convenience for privacy. It’s also intentionally deceptive. They’re helping themselves; not you.
But what about a piece of paper in a wallet or pocketbook? That’s straight forward as there’s no third party involved. And it is a much safer method for password storage than entrusting privacy to Facebook, Google, Twitter, or any of the other data vacuums. Sadly, most admit paper can be a pain keeping up to date and not falling apart. Same goes for hiding a print out of all access keys in a desk drawer — that trick was known (and exploited) fifty years ago.
Also from time past are the early versions of digital password managers. Some trace their origin back to room sized main frames and terminals. New designs showed up on DOS personal computers – which were actually more secure because the data was stored locally. It took the advent of the Internet to inspire some bright spark to switch the pitch to ‘cloud storage’. Those sales reps assured everyone it was safe. They were either knowingly misleading or truly naive. Building a bunker invariably invites attack. Like the phrase “master password”, and the aforementioned “convenience credentials”, anytime someone says “cloud storage”, they are touting technology that is lacking in full disclosure.
What is even worse is the home made recipe wherein a site name is used with a zip code, birth date, anniversary, etc. Example:. Amazon28630. It really doesn’t matter how esoteric the combination. If it’s only letters (even when upper and lowercase) mixed with numbers, algorithms to crack the code are commonly available. If the ‘string’ includes a word (in any language) it breaks even faster. Yes, symbols help: #try to avoid the obvious!
A good guide: “If you can remember it, the password is weak”. So if the traditional is now out dated and using a variation on the same credentials is really insecure, what’s the answer? Well, of course we will suggest FaceGuard; in part because it was developed to avoid all the described shortcomings. However — there is that reality mentioned at the beginning: “People almost always solve password hassles their own way… (and) they’re reluctant to change.”
There is an answer, maybe. Since 97% of Americans do not use a password manager, something is not appealing with the current approach. Using fear to sell has worked in the past – but people are convinced they are more likely to get hit by lightning than hacked. Convenience is an excellent benefit – but with only 3% buying, something isn’t working. From a lay person’s perspective — if a pass receiver drops the ball 97% of the time, expecting that play to work is not a good idea.
Instead, FaceGuard is going with fun and free; plus nostalgia, ease of use, endorphin rushes, and memories. It’s our feeling those emotions evolve a pain in the posterior to pleasure. No maser password to get lost, forgotten or hacked; no selling cloud security fantasies; no data surreptitiously stolen. The experince is surprise and delight every time a web site or app is accessed or a device opened. And to make the FaceGuard password manager adoption process even more rewarding, we’re going to be giving away $5,000.00 a month for the fastest fingers on the planet.