The real problem that I have seen with passwords is not the ease of guessing them through brute force attacks; however it's the lack of care that goes into quality passwords, and the ease of obtaining passwords through various tools (ie: key logging, or radio frequency eavesdropping). Numerous attempts at obtaining a more secured method of security have been attempted, but text is so far the only kind that can be done with ease across the board. Using images would be quite difficult for long term uses, as one must retain a particular image for the entire life of the security measure. If the image ever is accidentally modified, becomes corrupted, or is lost due to failed sotrage, then how would one access their restricted content? If you use text as a backup, then it suffers the same security flaw as all text authorisation, and the idea of using images becomes a moot point.
This is why there have been advancements in biometrics, especially in fingerprint security. Unfortunately, it's been proven, consistently, that fingerprint security is far less reliable than text. Recently, there was a headline of using one's "heartbeat" as a means of user authentication. The problem with this? Bluetooth. Well, bluetooth is only one of the problems; there's also device cloning, or capturing a sample of the individual's heartbeat (eavesdropping on BT communications), and then spoofing the heartbeat with a new device. Okay; well, what about RFID chips/tags? That's something that's been hacked endlessly, yet we still use unencrypted RFID everywhere. Do you have a tin foil wallet? I have one...
Security measures that are currently used, or have been considered, tend to suffer from the same problem: nothing is perfect. If someone wants to break that security, they can... somehow. Fortunately, our current high-bit encryption is perfectly fine as it is - at least, that's the speculation, as it's still unknown if the NSA is harbouring a vulnerability in AES encryption, as well as others - but we must remember that the end-user is always going to be the weakest link in a strong chain; like in the case of encryption. The more secure your method is, the less forgiving it has to be. It's a perpetual cycle, and it's going to be a while before we can find a method that won't be cheated by some shmuck with nothing better to do. Eventually, encryption will be crackable with a mobile phone; but until that day comes, that's our best chance.
The only way to stop hackers from doing their thing is to not give them a reason to hack... and that will probably never change.
Facebook
Twitter