





     delim $$



                  PPaasssswwoorrdd SSeeccuurriittyy:: AA CCaassee HHiissttoorryy


                            _R_o_b_e_r_t _M_o_r_r_i_s
                             _K_e_n _T_h_o_m_p_s_o_n
                        AT&T Bell Laboratories
                           Murray Hill, NJ


                               _A_B_S_T_R_A_C_T

               This  paper  describes  the  history  of  the
          design  of  the  password  security  scheme  on  a
          remotely   accessed   time-sharing   system.   The
          present  design  was  the  result  of   countering
          observed  attempts  to  penetrate the system.  The
          result is a compromise  between  extreme  security
          and ease of use.


     IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN

          Password  security  on  the UNIX(R) time-sharing system
     [1] is provided by a collection of programs whose  elaborate
     and strange design is the outgrowth of many years of experi-
     ence with earlier versions.  To help develop a  secure  sys-
     tem, we have had a continuing competition to devise new ways
     to attack the security of the system (the bad guy)  and,  at
     the  same  time,  to devise new techniques to resist the new
     attacks (the good guy).  This competition has  been  in  the
     same  vein as the competition of long standing between manu-
     facturers of armor plate and those of armor-piercing shells.
     For this reason, the description that follows will trace the
     history of the password system rather than simply presenting
     the  program in its current state.  In this way, the reasons
     for the design will be made clearer, as the design cannot be
     understood without also understanding the potential attacks.

          An underlying goal has been to provide  password  secu-
     rity  at  minimal  inconvenience to the users of the system.
     For example, those who want to run a completely open  system
     without  passwords,  or to have passwords only at the option
     of the individual users, are able to do so, while those  who
     require  all  of  their  users to have passwords gain a high
     degree of security against  penetration  of  the  system  by
     unauthorized users.

          The  password  system  must be able not only to prevent
     any access to the system by unauthorized users (i.e. prevent
     them from logging in at all), but it must also prevent users









     SMM:17-2                   Password Security: A Case History


     who are already logged in from doing things  that  they  are
     not  authorized  to  do.  The so called ``super-user'' pass-
     word, for example, is especially critical because the super-
     user has all sorts of permissions and has essentially unlim-
     ited access to all system resources.

          Password security is of course only  one  component  of
     overall  system  security, but it is an essential component.
     Experience has shown  that  attempts  to  penetrate  remote-
     access systems have been astonishingly sophisticated.

          Remote-access systems are peculiarly vulnerable to pen-
     etration by outsiders as there are  threats  at  the  remote
     terminal,  along  the communications link, as well as at the
     computer  itself.   Although  the  security  of  a  password
     encryption  algorithm  is  an  interesting  intellectual and
     mathematical problem, it is only one tiny facet  of  a  very
     large  problem.   In practice, physical security of the com-
     puter, communications security of the  communications  link,
     and physical control of the computer itself loom as far more
     important issues.  Perhaps most important of all is  control
     over  the  actions of ex-employees, since they are not under
     any direct control and  they  may  have  intimate  knowledge
     about  the  system,  its  resources,  and methods of access.
     Good system security involves realistic  evaluation  of  the
     risks  not  only  of  deliberate  attacks but also of casual
     unauthorized access and accidental disclosure.

     PPRROOLLOOGGUUEE

          The UNIX system was first implemented with  a  password
     file  that  contained the actual passwords of all the users,
     and for that reason the password file had to be heavily pro-
     tected  against being either read or written.  Although his-
     torically, this had been  the  technique  used  for  remote-
     access systems, it was completely unsatisfactory for several
     reasons.

          The technique is excessively vulnerable  to  lapses  in
     security.   Temporary  loss of protection can occur when the
     password file is being edited or otherwise modified.   There
     is  no  way  to  prevent  the making of copies by privileged
     users.  Experience with several earlier  remote-access  sys-
     tems  showed  that  such  lapses occur with frightening fre-
     quency.  Perhaps the most memorable such  occasion  occurred
     in  the  early  60's when a system administrator on the CTSS
     system at MIT was editing the password file and another sys-
     tem  administrator  was  editing  the  daily message that is
     printed on everyone's terminal on login.  Due to a  software
     design  error,  the  temporary editor files of the two users
     were interchanged and thus, for a time,  the  password  file
     was printed on every terminal when it was logged in.











     Password Security: A Case History                   SMM:17-3


          Once  such  a  lapse  in  security has been discovered,
     everyone's password must be changed, usually simultaneously,
     at  a considerable administrative cost.  This is not a great
     matter, but far more serious is the high probability of such
     lapses going unnoticed by the system administrators.

          Security  against  unauthorized disclosure of the pass-
     words was, in the last analysis, impossible with this system
     because, for example, if the contents of the file system are
     put on to magnetic tape for backup, as they  must  be,  then
     anyone who has physical access to the tape can read anything
     on it with no restriction.

          Many programs must get  information  of  various  kinds
     about the users of the system, and these programs in general
     should have no special permission to read the password file.
     The  information which should have been in the password file
     actually was distributed (or replicated) into  a  number  of
     files,  all  of  which had to be updated whenever a user was
     added to or dropped from the system.

     TTHHEE FFIIRRSSTT SSCCHHEEMMEE

          The obvious solution is to arrange that  the  passwords
     not  appear in the system at all, and it is not difficult to
     decide that this can be done by encrypting each user's pass-
     word,  putting only the encrypted form in the password file,
     and throwing away his original password  (the  one  that  he
     typed  in).  When the user later tries to log in to the sys-
     tem, the password that he types is  encrypted  and  compared
     with the encrypted version in the password file.  If the two
     match, his login attempt is accepted.   Such  a  scheme  was
     first  described  in [3, p.91ff.].  It also seemed advisable
     to devise a system in which neither the  password  file  nor
     the  password  program itself needed to be protected against
     being read by anyone.

          All that was needed to implement  these  ideas  was  to
     find  a  means  of  encryption  that  was  very difficult to
     invert, even when the encryption program is available.  Most
     of  the  standard  encryption methods used (in the past) for
     encryption of messages are rather easy to invert.  A  conve-
     nient  and  rather good encryption program happened to exist
     on the system at the time; it  simulated  the  M-209  cipher
     machine  [4]  used by the U.S. Army during World War II.  It
     turned out that the M-209 program was  usable,  but  with  a
     given  key, the ciphers produced by this program are trivial
     to invert.  It is a much more difficult matter to  find  out
     the  key given the cleartext input and the enciphered output
     of the program.  Therefore, the password was used not as the
     text  to  be  encrypted  but  as the key, and a constant was
     encrypted using this key.  The encrypted result was  entered
     into the password file.










     SMM:17-4                   Password Security: A Case History


     AATTTTAACCKKSS OONN TTHHEE FFIIRRSSTT AAPPPPRROOAACCHH

          Suppose  that the bad guy has available the text of the
     password encryption program and the complete password  file.
     Suppose  also  that he has substantial computing capacity at
     his disposal.

          One obvious approach to penetrating the password mecha-
     nism is to attempt to find a general method of inverting the
     encryption algorithm.  Very possibly this can be  done,  but
     few  successful results have come to light, despite substan-
     tial efforts extending over  a  period  of  more  than  five
     years.   The  results  have  not proved to be very useful in
     penetrating systems.

          Another approach to penetration is simply to keep  try-
     ing  potential  passwords until one succeeds; this is a gen-
     eral cryptanalytic approach called _k_e_y _s_e_a_r_c_h_.  Human beings
     being  what  they are, there is a strong tendency for people
     to choose relatively short and simple  passwords  that  they
     can  remember.   Given  free choice, most people will choose
     their passwords from a restricted character  set  (e.g.  all
     lower-case  letters),  and will often choose words or names.
     This human habit makes the key search job a great deal  eas-
     ier.

          The  critical  factor  involved  in  key  search is the
     amount of time needed to encrypt a potential password and to
     check the result against an entry in the password file.  The
     running time to encrypt one trial  password  and  check  the
     result turned out to be approximately 1.25 milliseconds on a
     PDP-11/70 when the encryption algorithm was recoded for max-
     imum  speed.   It  is takes essentially no more time to test
     the encrypted trial password against all the passwords in an
     entire  password  file, or for that matter, against any col-
     lection of encrypted passwords, perhaps collected from  many
     installations.

          If we want to check all passwords of length _n that con-
     sist entirely of lower-case  letters,  the  number  of  such
     passwords  is  $26  sup n$.  If we suppose that the password
     consists of printable characters only, then  the  number  of
     possible  passwords  is somewhat less than $95 sup n$.  (The
     standard system ``character erase'' and ``line kill''  char-
     acters  are,  for  example,  not  prime candidates.)  We can
     immediately estimate the running time of a program that will
     test  every password of a given length with all of its char-
     acters chosen from some set of  characters.   The  following
     table  gives  estimates  of  the  running time required on a
     PDP-11/70 to test all possible character strings  of  length
     $n$  chosen  from  various  sets  of characters: namely, all
     lower-case letters, all lower-case letters plus digits,  all
     alphanumeric  characters, all 95 printable ASCII characters,
     and finally all 128 ASCII characters.









     Password Security: A Case History                   SMM:17-5


     cccccc cccccc  nnnnnn.        26  lower-case  36  lower-case
     letters    62  alphanumeric  95  printable   all  128  ASCII
     n    letters   and            digits  characters     charac-
     ters     characters
     1    30   msec.  40  msec.  80  msec.  120  msec. 160  msec.
     2    800  msec.  2  sec.    5  sec.    11   sec.   20   sec.
     3    22   sec.   58   sec.   5   min.    17  min.   43  min.
     4    10 min.  35 min.   5 hrs.    28 hrs.   93 hrs.   5    4
     hrs.    21 hrs.   318 hrs.  6    107 hrs.


     One  has  to conclude that it is no great matter for someone
     with access to a PDP-11 to test  all  lower-case  alphabetic
     strings  up  to length five and, given access to the machine
     for, say, several weekends, to test all such strings  up  to
     six characters in length.  By using such a program against a
     collection of  actual  encrypted  passwords,  a  substantial
     fraction of all the passwords will be found.

          Another  profitable  approach for the bad guy is to use
     the word list from a dictionary or to use a list  of  names.
     For example, a large commercial dictionary contains typical-
     lly about 250,000 words; these words can be checked in about
     five  minutes.   Again, a noticeable fraction of any collec-
     tion of passwords will be found.   Improvements  and  exten-
     sions will be (and have been) found by a determined bad guy.
     Some ``good'' things to try are:

     -    The dictionary with the words spelled backwards.

     -    A list of first names (best obtained from some  mailing
          list).   Last  names, street names, and city names also
          work well.

     -    The above with initial upper-case letters.

     -    All valid license plate numbers in your  state.   (This
          takes about five hours in New Jersey.)

     -    Room  numbers,  social security numbers, telephone num-
          bers, and the like.

          The authors have conducted experiments to try to deter-
     mine  typical  users' habits in the choice of passwords when
     no constraint is put on their choice.  The results were dis-
     appointing, except to the bad guy.  In a collection of 3,289
     passwords gathered from many users over  a  long  period  of
     time;

          15 were a single ASCII character;

          72 were strings of two ASCII characters;











     SMM:17-6                   Password Security: A Case History


          464 were strings of three ASCII characters;

          477 were string of four alphamerics;

          706  were  five  letters,  all upper-case or all lower-
          case;

          605 were six letters, all lower-case.

     An additional 492 passwords appeared  in  various  available
     dictionaries,  name  lists, and the like.  A total of 2,831,
     or 86% of this sample of passwords fell into  one  of  these
     classes.

          There  was, of course, considerable overlap between the
     dictionary results and the character string  searches.   The
     dictionary search alone, which required only five minutes to
     run, produced about one third of the passwords.

          Users could be urged (or forced) to use  either  longer
     passwords  or  passwords chosen from a larger character set,
     or the system could itself choose passwords for the users.

     AANN AANNEECCDDOOTTEE

          An entertaining and instructive example is the  attempt
     made  at  one  installation  to force users to use less pre-
     dictable passwords.  The users  did  not  choose  their  own
     passwords; the system supplied them.  The supplied passwords
     were eight characters long and were taken from the character
     set  consisting of lower-case letters and digits.  They were
     generated by a pseudo-random number generator with  only  $2
     sup 15$ starting values.  The time required to search (again
     on a PDP-11/70) through all character strings  of  length  8
     from a 36-character alphabet is 112 years.

          Unfortunately,  only  $2 sup 15$ of them need be looked
     at, because that is the number of possible  outputs  of  the
     random number generator.  The bad guy did, in fact, generate
     and test each of these strings and found every  one  of  the
     system-generated  passwords  using a total of only about one
     minute of machine time.

     IIMMPPRROOVVEEMMEENNTTSS TTOO TTHHEE FFIIRRSSTT AAPPPPRROOAACCHH

     11..  SSlloowweerr EEnnccrryyppttiioonn

          Obviously, the first algorithm used was far  too  fast.
     The  announcement of the DES encryption algorithm [2] by the
     National Bureau of Standards was timely and fortunate.   The
     DES  is,  by design, hard to invert, but equally valuable is
     the fact that it is extremely slow when implemented in soft-
     ware.   The  DES  was  implemented and used in the following
     way: The first eight characters of the user's  password  are









     Password Security: A Case History                   SMM:17-7


     used  as  a  key  for the DES; then the algorithm is used to
     encrypt a constant.  Although this constant is zero  at  the
     moment,  it  is  easily accessible and can be made installa-
     tion-dependent.  Then the DES algorithm is iterated 25 times
     and the resulting 64 bits are repacked to become a string of
     11 printable characters.

     22..  LLeessss PPrreeddiiccttaabbllee PPaasssswwoorrddss

          The password entry program was modified so as  to  urge
     the  user to use more obscure passwords.  If the user enters
     an alphabetic password (all upper-case  or  all  lower-case)
     shorter  than  six  characters,  or a password from a larger
     character set shorter than five characters, then the program
     asks  him  to enter a longer password.  This further reduces
     the efficacy of key search.

          These improvements make  it  exceedingly  difficult  to
     find  any  individual  password.   The user is warned of the
     risks and if he cooperates, he is very safe indeed.  On  the
     other hand, he is not prevented from using his spouse's name
     if he wants to.

     33..  SSaalltteedd PPaasssswwoorrddss

          The key search technique is still likely to turn  up  a
     few passwords when it is used on a large collection of pass-
     words, and it seemed wise to make this task as difficult  as
     possible.   To  this  end, when a password is first entered,
     the password program obtains  a  12-bit  random  number  (by
     reading  the  real-time clock) and appends this to the pass-
     word typed in by  the  user.   The  concatenated  string  is
     encrypted  and  both  the 12-bit random quantity (called the
     $salt$) and the 64-bit result of the encryption are  entered
     into the password file.

          When  the  user later logs in to the system, the 12-bit
     quantity is extracted from the password file and appended to
     the  typed  password.   The encrypted result is required, as
     before, to be the same as the remaining 64 bits in the pass-
     word  file.  This modification does not increase the task of
     finding any individual password, starting from scratch,  but
     now  the  work of testing a given character string against a
     large collection of encrypted passwords has been  multiplied
     by 4096 ($2 sup 12$).  The reason for this is that there are
     4096 encrypted versions of each password and one of them has
     been picked more or less at random by the system.

          With  this  modification, it is likely that the bad guy
     can spend days of computer time trying to find a password on
     a  system  with hundreds of passwords, and find none at all.
     More important is the fact that it  becomes  impractical  to
     prepare   an  encrypted  dictionary  in  advance.   Such  an
     encrypted dictionary could be used to crack new passwords in









     SMM:17-8                   Password Security: A Case History


     milliseconds when they appear.

          There  is a (not inadvertent) side effect of this modi-
     fication.  It becomes nearly impossible to find out  whether
     a  person with passwords on two or more systems has used the
     same password on all of them, unless you already know  that.

     44..  TThhee TThhrreeaatt ooff tthhee DDEESS CChhiipp

          Chips to perform the DES encryption are already commer-
     cially available and they are very fast.  The use of such  a
     chip  speeds  up  the  process  of password hunting by three
     orders of magnitude.  To avert this possibility, one of  the
     internal tables of the DES algorithm (in particular, the so-
     called E-table) is changed in a  way  that  depends  on  the
     12-bit random number.  The E-table is inseparably wired into
     the DES chip, so that the commercial chip  cannot  be  used.
     Obviously,  the bad guy could have his own chip designed and
     built, but the cost would be unthinkable.

     55..  AA SSuubbttllee PPooiinntt

          To login successfully on the UNIX system, it is  neces-
     sary  after  dialing  in to type a valid user name, and then
     the correct password for that user name.  It is poor  design
     to  write  the  login command in such a way that it tells an
     interloper when he has typed in a invalid  user  name.   The
     response  to an invalid name should be identical to that for
     a valid name.

          When the slow encryption  algorithm  was  first  imple-
     mented,  the  encryption  was done only if the user name was
     valid, because otherwise there was no encrypted password  to
     compare with the supplied password.  The result was that the
     response was delayed by about one-half second  if  the  name
     was  valid, but was immediate if invalid.  The bad guy could
     find out whether a particular user name was valid.  The rou-
     tine was modified to do the encryption in either case.

     CCOONNCCLLUUSSIIOONNSS

          On  the  issue  of  password security, UNIX is probably
     better than most systems.  The use  of  encrypted  passwords
     appears  reasonably  secure in the absence of serious atten-
     tion of experts in the field.

          It is also  worth  some  effort  to  conceal  even  the
     encrypted passwords.  Some UNIX systems have instituted what
     is called an ``external security code'' that must  be  typed
     when  dialing  into  the  system, but before logging in.  If
     this code is changed periodically, then someone with an  old
     password will likely be prevented from using it.











     Password Security: A Case History                   SMM:17-9


          Whenever  any  security  procedure  is  instituted that
     attempts to deny access to unauthorized persons, it is  wise
     to  keep  a  record  of  both  successful  and  unsuccessful
     attempts to get at the secured resource.  Just as an out-of-
     hours  visitor  to  a computer center normally must not only
     identify himself, but a record is usually also kept  of  his
     entry.   Just so, it is a wise precaution to make and keep a
     record of all attempts to log  into  a  remote-access  time-
     sharing system, and certainly all unsuccessful attempts.

          Bad  guys  fall  on a spectrum whose one end is someone
     with ordinary access to a system and whose goal is  to  find
     out  a  particular password (usually that of the super-user)
     and, at the other end, someone who wishes to collect as much
     password  information  as  possible  from as many systems as
     possible.  Most of the work reported here  serves  to  frus-
     trate  the  latter  type;  our experience indicates that the
     former type of bad guy never was very successful.

          We recognize that a time-sharing system must operate in
     a hostile environment.  We did not attempt to hide the secu-
     rity aspects of the operating system,  thereby  playing  the
     customary  make-believe game in which weaknesses of the sys-
     tem are not discussed no matter  how  apparent.   Rather  we
     advertised  the password algorithm and invited attack in the
     belief that this approach  would  minimize  future  trouble.
     The approach has been successful.

     RReeffeerreenncceess

     [1]  Ritchie,  D.M.  and Thompson, K.  The UNIX Time-Sharing
          System.  _C_o_m_m_. _A_C_M 1177 (July 1974), pp. 365-375.

     [2]  _P_r_o_p_o_s_e_d _F_e_d_e_r_a_l _I_n_f_o_r_m_a_t_i_o_n _P_r_o_c_e_s_s_i_n_g _D_a_t_a _E_n_c_r_y_p_t_i_o_n
          _S_t_a_n_d_a_r_d_.  Federal Register (40FR12134), March 17, 1975

     [3]  Wilkes, M. V.  _T_i_m_e_-_S_h_a_r_i_n_g _C_o_m_p_u_t_e_r _S_y_s_t_e_m_s_.  American
          Elsevier, New York, (1968).

     [4]  U. S. Patent Number 2,089,603.




















