## 5 Simulation Results  
Laboratory Studies on Five Two-Factor Authentication Methods Regarding Configuration, Use, and Evaluation by Users  
Many widely used 2 FA methods have insufficient or inadequate user usage and behavior analysis. Another aspect is that previous research on using 2 FA is difficult to compare due to the wide variety of working environments. Below are some references for these studies. [PERSON] et al. [29] conducted a two-week study of five common 2 FA methods for collecting quantitative and qualitative data. Overall, the participants gave high marks to the methods used, and many expressed an interest in using 2 FA to provide more security for their sensitive online accounts. A second laboratory study was carried out in which participants rated the overall usability of the setup procedure for the five methods. The results showed that only a few participants had difficulties setting up a hardware token and one-time password, but generally, users found the methods easy to set up. [PERSON] et al. [30] conducted two studies that measured the usability and acceptability of using the YubiKey (a type of FIDO U2F-compatible hardware token) as the second factor in securing a Google account. Using a think-aloud protocol, the participants encountered difficulties in use and proposed certain design changes. After repeating the study with a new group of users, they discovered that the ease of use increased but not the acceptability. The lack of acceptability was partly due to the lack of awareness of the risks and the fear of losing the device. [PERSON] and collaborators [31] studied the configuration and authentication of four of Google's 2 FA methods. They found that participants experienced many failures and found that Google's 2 FA system was difficult to use and needed improvement. They found little difference among the four different 2 FA methods when they compared efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction measures--illustrating that one method is not necessarily more or less useful than another. [PERSON] et al. [32] reported on Google's internal implementation of security keys to their employees. They reported a long-term reduction in authentication-related support calls after implementing hardware keys. In addition, they demonstrated a significant reduction in overall authentication time compared to other one-code-based methods. [PERSON] et al. [33] described two studies of the use of YubiKeys. The study found many usability issues with the setup process and workflow of the YubiKey but found that day-to-day usage was significantly higher.  
Platform administrators executed simulation parameters in the test environment on a Windows Server 2019 operating system while accessing the client from workstations configured with Windows 8, 8.1, and 10 operating systems. Compatibility tests were conducted with the Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla, and Google Chrome browsers to ensure seamless site connectivity. Each workstation utilized antivirus programs, such as Bittdefender, and Windows Defender, spyware protection (Spybot), and a management console (ManageEngine) was installed.  
Windows logs, application security logs, system logs, and logs from other relevant programs were collected to assess the presence of errors, security breaches, vulnerabilities, and cyberattacks. Security information was analyzed regularly at 24 h intervals throughout a 30-day simulation period. During this evaluation, the logs indicated the occurrence of several phishing attacks. Fortunately, the installed antivirus programs successfully blocked these malicious attempts without compromising the platform's functionality or affecting the workstations.