FEAR APPEALS VERSUS PRIMING IN RANSOMWARE TRAINING

Employee non-compliance is at the heart of many of today’s security incidents. Training programs often employ fear appeals to motivate individuals to follow policy and take action to reduce security risks. While the literature shows that fear appeals drive intent to comply, there is much less evidence of their impact after intention is formed. Building on IPAM – a process nuanced model for compliance training and assessment – this study contrasts the impact of fear appeals vs. self-efficacy priming on ransomware training. In our proposed study, a pool of students will participate in a three-step series of training events. Some participants will encounter enhanced fear appeals at each step while others will be presented with materials that include priming signals intended to foster development of increased self-efficacy. Previously identified drivers of behavior (intent, processed-nuanced forms of self-efficacy, and outcome expectations) are measured so that the effect of the treatments can be contrasted. A scenario agreement methodology is used to indicate behavior as a dependent variable. We expect to show that while fear appeals are useful and help build intent to comply at the motivational stage, process-nuanced self-efficacy treatments are expected have a stronger effect on behavior post-intentional

Will SOC telemetry data improve predictive models of user riskiness? A work in progress

Security Operation Centers (SOC) play a key role in protecting organizations from many cybersecurity threats, such as system intrusion or information breaches. A major challenge in improving SOC operations is the adequacy of the data used to identify such threats. Detection tools employed by SOCs are largely based on observable telemetry indicators (e.g., network traffic patterns or system logs and activities collected from user devices). However, the use of such telemetry data without understanding human behaviors in-depth can lead to increasing false-positive alerts. Prior work shows that it can even be a more significant problem when analysts largely ignore alerts if they are overwhelmingly false-positive. These false positive alerts raise SOC analysts’ cognitive workload, diminish conscious cognitive processing, and decrease their trust in future alerts

Do measures of security compliance intent equal non-compliance scenario agreement?

To better protect organizations from the threat of insiders, IS security (ISS) research frequently emphasizes IS Security Policy (ISP) behavior. The effectiveness of an assessment model is typically analyzed either using short survey statements (behavior survey) or by using scenario agreement (prospective scenario) to measure current and prospective compliance (or non-compliance) behavior. However, a significant gap is the lack of statistical evidence to demonstrate that these two measures or dependent variables (DV) sufficiently agree with one another. We report on an effort to compare and contrast two assessment models which employed alternate styles of DVs and demonstrate that the primary construct from two different ISS behavioral theories had approximately the same effect size on either of the DVs. Our findings add support for substantial (but not overly correlated) synchronization between the two DV values, since we also observe that the prospective scenario non-compliance measure resulted in lower model fit while the behavior survey compliance measures fit both models with higher accuracy. We discuss our findings and recommend that for many studies there can be value in employing both DVs

Assessing information security compliant behaviour using the self-determination theory

Information security research shows that employees are a source of some of the security incidents in the organisation. This often results from failure to comply with the Information Security Policies (ISPs). The question is, therefore, how to improve information security behaviour of employees so that it complies with the ISPs. This study aims to contribute to the understanding of information security behaviour, especially how it can be improved, from an intrinsic motivation perspective. A review of the literature suggested that research in information security behaviour is still predominantly based on the extrinsic perspective, while the intrinsic perspective has not received as much attention. This resulted in the study being carried out from the perspective of the self-determination theory (SDT) since this theory has also not received as much attention in the study of information security behaviour. The study then proposed an information security compliant behaviour conceptual model based on the self-determination theory, (ISCBMSDT). Based on this model, a questionnaire, the ISCBMSDT questionnaire, was developed using the Human Aspects of Information Security Questionnaire and SDT. Using this questionnaire, a survey (n = 263) was carried out at a South African university and responses were received from the academic, administrative and operational staff. The following statistical analysis of the data was carried out: exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis, analysis of variance (ANOVA), independent samples test (t-tests) and Pearson correlation analysis. The responses to the survey questions suggest that autonomy questions received positive perception followed by competence questions and relatedness questions. The correlation analysis results show the existence of a statistically significant relationship between competence and autonomy factors. Also, a partial significant relationship between autonomy and relatedness factors as well as between competence and relatedness factors was observed. The exploratory factor analysis that was performed on the questionnaire produced 11 factors. Cronbach alpha was then computed for the eleven factors and all were found to be above 0.7, thus suggesting that the questionnaire is valid and reliable. The results of the research study also suggest that competence and autonomy could be more important than relatedness in directing information security behaviour among employees.School of ComputingM. Tech. (Information Technology