skip to main content
10.1145/1943403.1943449acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Targeted risk communication for computer security

Published:13 February 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Attacks on computer systems are rapidly becoming more numerous and more sophisticated, and current preventive techniques do not seem able to keep pace. Many successful attacks can be attributed to user errors: for example, while focused on other tasks, users may succumb to 'social engineering' attacks such as phishing or trojan horses. Warnings about the danger of these attacks are often vaguely worded and given long before the dangers are realized, and are therefore too easy to ignore. However, we hypothesize that users are more likely to be persuaded by messages that (1) leverage mental models to describe the dangers, (2) describe particular vulnerabilities that the user may be exposed to and (3) are delivered close in time before the danger may actually be realized. We discuss the design and initial implementation of a system to achieve this. It first shows a video about a potential danger, then creates warnings tailored to the user's environment and given at the time they may be most useful, displaying a still frame or snippet from the video to remind the user of the potential danger. The system uses templates of user activities as input to a markov logic network to recognize potentially risky behaviors. This approach can identify likely next steps that can be used to predict immediate danger and customize warnings.

References

  1. A. Acquisti. Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing and sharing on facebook. PETS, June 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Acquisti and J. Grossklags. Uncertainty, ambiguity and privacy. In Fourth Annual Workshop Economics and Information Security (WEIS 2005), MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. F. Asgharpour, D. Liu, and L. Camp. Mental models of computer security risks. In Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (WEIS), 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. V. Bellotti and A. Sellen. Design for privacy in ubiquitous computing environments. In Proceedings of the third conference on European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. Blythe, J. Hobbs, P. Domingos, R. Kate, and R. Mooney. Implementing weighted abuction in markov logic. In International Workshop on Semantics of Computing, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. L. Camp. Mental models of privacy and security. Technology and Society Magazine, 28(3), 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. L. F. Cranor and S. Garfinkel. Security and Usability. O'Reilly, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. V. Gargv and J. Camp. How Safe is Safe Enough: Online Version. In Workshop on Security and Human Behavior, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C. Herron, H. York, C. Corrie, and S. Cole. A comparison study of the effects of a story-based video instructional package versus a text-based instructional package in the intermediate-level foreign language classroom. CALICO JOURNAL, 23(2):281, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. M. Jakobsson, A. Tsow, A. Shah, E. Blevis, and Y. Lim. What instills trust? A qualitative study of phishing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4886:356, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. P. Johnson-Laird. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Harvard Univ Pr, 1986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. Kahneman and A. Tversky. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2):263--291, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. D. Nau, T. C. Au, O. Ilghami, U. Kuter, J. Murdock, D. Wu, and F. Yaman. Shop2: An htn planning system. JAIR, 20:379--404, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. Pattinson and G. Anderson. How well are information risks being communicated to your computer end-users? Information Management & Computer Security, 15(5):362--371, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. D. Podszebka, C. Conklin, M. Apple, and A. Windus. Comparison of Video and Text Narrative Presentations on Comprehension and Vocabulary Acquisition. Geneseo Annual Reading and Literacy Symposium, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. Richardson and P. Domingos. Markov logic networks. Machine Learning. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Schroeder and U. Capt. Using prospect theory to investigate decision-making bias within an information security context, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. A. Tversky, P. Slovic, and D. Kahneman. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Social Cognition: Key Readings, page 167, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Targeted risk communication for computer security

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IUI '11: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces
        February 2011
        504 pages
        ISBN:9781450304191
        DOI:10.1145/1943403

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 13 February 2011

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • poster

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader