New Faceplant attack exposes serious flaw in Windows Hello at Black Hat

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 1,918   +58
Staff
Bottom line: For Microsoft, which has promoted Windows Hello as part of its broader push to phase out passwords, new research highlights that biometric logins are only as secure as the systems that safeguard their data. As long as attackers with administrative access can tamper with stored templates, the promise of face- or fingerprint-based authentication remains vulnerable.

Two German security researchers have disclosed a technique that allows attackers with elevated system privileges to bypass Microsoft's Windows Hello for Business authentication. The findings, presented at the Black Hat USA conference in Las Vegas, expose a new vulnerability in Microsoft's enterprise-grade biometric login framework and mark the second major exploit targeting the technology in recent months.

The attack, dubbed Faceplant by ERNW researchers Baptiste David and Tillmann Osswald, doesn't rely on fooling a camera with fake images or exploiting hardware flaws. Instead, it targets Windows Hello at a deeper level by manipulating how biometric data is stored and verified.

The exploit unfolds in several stages. First, an attacker creates a biometric profile of their own face on any Windows device. This generates a biometric template – a digital representation of the user's face stored locally for authentication. By decrypting this file, extracting the data, and injecting it into the biometric database of a target system, the attacker can effectively replace the victim's facial scan with their own. Once the altered template is in place, the attacker can log into corporate accounts as the victim, using only their own face.

Osswald explained that Faceplant builds on a previous ERNW demonstration from July known as Face Swap, which required modifying identifiers between accounts already registered on the same device. By contrast, Faceplant is more versatile, since attackers can prepare their biometric template on any machine before injecting it into a victim's system.

"We can now generate the malicious template anywhere. The real difference is that we're no longer limited to swapping identifiers," Osswald told The Register.

At the core of the weakness is how Windows Hello for Business integrates with Microsoft identity platforms such as Entra ID and Active Directory. During setup, Windows Hello generates a cryptographic key tied to the biometric profile and stores it in a database linked to the Windows Biometric Service. Although this entry is protected by Microsoft's CryptProtectData mechanism, the ERNW team demonstrated that a local administrator can break the encryption and implant new biometric data.

The Black Hat demo left little doubt about the risk. On stage, one researcher enrolled his face on a separate laptop, decrypted and extracted the template, and then injected it into a colleague's machine. Within moments, the altered system accepted the fake credentials, granting access to the domain account without the legitimate user ever being involved.

Microsoft acknowledged the research and confirmed the vulnerability but stressed the conditions required for a successful exploit. "The scenarios described require an attacker to have obtained prior administrative access to a target system," a Microsoft spokesperson told Forbes. The company added that Enhanced Sign-In Security for Windows Hello offers protection against such risks by using hardware-backed safeguards to secure biometric data and prevent tampering with authentication components.

ESS runs in a virtualized security environment above the operating system and is designed to block database-level attacks. However, not all hardware supports it, and on many enterprise devices it is not enabled by default. Osswald noted that even relatively recent machines fail to meet ESS requirements when paired with certain AMD processors.

Fixing the flaw will not be simple. The researchers suggested that fully mitigating the issue could require either a major overhaul of Windows Hello's code or shifting more biometric processing into secure hardware such as a Trusted Platform Module. Until then, they recommend that organizations relying on Windows Hello for Business without ESS enabled reconsider biometric logins. A fallback to PIN-based authentication, while less convenient, would be more secure under current conditions.

Image credit: The Register

Permalink to story:

 
A casual reader may wonder what the big deal is, noting that if one has administrative privileges, couldn't they also modify a password database?

From my understanding, one of the reasons this attack works - and is more insidious than swapping out a password in a database - is because of the fundamental nature of biometrics. Setting aside for the moment that they should never be used as passwords in the first place (at least not as the only factor), biometric information is fuzzy or noisy, whether it is your fingerprint, iris, face, or something else. Thus, your device typically doesn't keep just one "image" of whatever biometric it is looking at. When you go to authenticate, it fuzzy matches what you provide it to what it stored in its database, and that could include multiple "truth images".

There's a range of how fuzzy the match should be: too fuzzy and anybody can get in, too strict and your own biometrics wouldn't match what's in the database because you got a spec of dust on your finger or face that wasn't there before. Regardless of that parameter, if an attacker can inject *their own* biometrics into the database, like the researchers did here, they can still leave in place the user's original biometrics. Thus, unlike a password swap, both users are able to login, leaving the victim unaware.

And of course, this is a problem in a corporate environment, where administrative access is more likely to be held by a disgruntled employee or what have you. Probably the bigger issue called out by the researchers has less to do with biometrics and more how local and active directory administrative systems interact.
 
biometric information is fuzzy or noisy

Very much noisy .. I do not think people understand that fingerprint scanners have a LARGE ACCEPTABLE margin of error (acceptable as defined by the reader OEM), and the same for facial recognition. to reiterate for others your finger/face scanner will let a user in if the data is ''close enough'' to the fudge factor... and in the old days that was 1:10 for finger scanners on lenovo's... so if the print was 90% .. that was ok to unlock. given facial spoofing this is much much much worse.

I'll stick to multiple layers of auth ...
 
This isn't a problem for a home user; it's a problem for corporations.

The admin who has access to your biometrics-enabled Windows machine will now have the means to impersonate you by logging into your machine and accessing any accounts that you can access with biometrics (passkeys, etc.) on that machine. If they can do this without a trace, ...
 
Back