Why do People Adopt, or Reject, Smartphone Security Tools?

A large variety of security tools exist for Smartphones, to help their owners to secure the phones and prevent unauthorised others from accessing their data and services. These range from screen locks to antivirus software to password managers. Yet many Smartphone owners do not use these tools despite their being free and easy to use. We were interested in exploring this apparent anomaly. A number of researchers have applied existing models of behaviour from other disciplines to try to understand these kinds of behaviours in a security context, and a great deal of research has examined adoption of screen locking mechanisms. We review the proposed models and consider how they might fail to describe adoption behaviours. We then present the Integrated Model of Behaviour Prediction (IMBP), a richer model than the ones tested thus far. We consider the kinds of factors that could be incorporated into this model in order to understand Smartphone owner adoption, or rejection, of security tools. The model seems promising, based on existing literature, and we plan to test its efficacy in future studies

Human Factors in Secure Software Development

While security research has made significant progress in the development of theoretically secure methods, software and algorithms, software still comes with many possible exploits, many of those using the human factor. The human factor is often called ``the weakest link'' in software security. To solve this, human factors research in security and privacy focus on the users of technology and consider their security needs. The research then asks how technology can serve users while minimizing risks and empowering them to retain control over their own data. However, these concepts have to be implemented by developers whose security errors may proliferate to all of their software's users. For example, software that stores data in an insecure way, does not secure network traffic correctly, or otherwise fails to adhere to secure programming best practices puts all of the software's users at risk. It is therefore critical that software developers implement security correctly. However, in addition to security rarely being a primary concern while producing software, developers may also not have extensive awareness, knowledge, training or experience in secure development. A lack of focus on usability in libraries, documentation, and tools that they have to use for security-critical components may exacerbate the problem by blowing up the investment of time and effort needed to "get security right". This dissertation's focus is how to support developers throughout the process of implementing software securely. This research aims to understand developers' use of resources, their mindsets as they develop, and how their background impacts code security outcomes. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods were employed online and in the laboratory, and large scale datasets were analyzed to conduct this research. This research found that the information sources developers use can contribute to code (in)security: copying and pasting code from online forums leads to achieving functional code quickly compared to using official documentation resources, but may introduce vulnerable code. We also compared the usability of cryptographic APIs, finding that poor usability, unsafe (possibly obsolete) defaults and unhelpful documentation also lead to insecure code. On the flip side, well-thought out documentation and abstraction levels can help improve an API's usability and may contribute to secure API usage. We found that developer experience can contribute to better security outcomes, and that studying students in lieu of professional developers can produce meaningful insights into developers' experiences with secure programming. We found that there is a multitude of online secure development advice, but that these advice sources are incomplete and may be insufficient for developers to retrieve help, which may cause them to choose un-vetted and potentially insecure resources. This dissertation supports that (a) secure development is subject to human factor challenges and (b) security can be improved by addressing these challenges and supporting developers. The work presented in this dissertation has been seminal in establishing human factors in secure development research within the security and privacy community and has advanced the dialogue about the rigorous use of empirical methods in security and privacy research. In these research projects, we repeatedly found that usability issues of security and privacy mechanisms, development practices, and operation routines are what leads to the majority of security and privacy failures that affect millions of end users

Factors Affecting Users' Disclosure Decisions in Android Runtime Permissions Model

Today, Android users are faced with several permissions' screens asking to access their personal information when using Android apps. In fact, Android users have to balance several considerations when choosing to grant or deny these data collection activities. Hence, it is important to understand how users' decisions are made and what factors play a role in users' decisions. A number of studies on the permissions' screens of Android devices have reported users discomfort and misunderstanding of the permission system. However, most studies were carried out on the old permission system where all permissions are presented at installation time, and the user has to either accept all the permissions or stop the installation. With the new permission system started with Android version 6.0 and higher, permissions are presented differently at run time. In this work, we aim to study users' disclosure decisions with the new run time system on Android. We have modeled users' disclosure decisions from three perspectives: dangerous permission type, clarity of rationale, and clarity of context. The study has been conducted on Amazon Mechanical Turk. The results show that dangerous permission type as well as clarity of the context have a statistical significant effect on users' disclosure decisions. On the other hand, clarity of dangerous permission's rationale does not contribute significantly to users' decisions. These findings shed light upon important factors that users consider in making privacy decisions in the new Android run time model. Such factors should be taken into account by Android apps developers when requesting access to users' private information

After Over-Privileged Permissions: Using Technology and Design to Create Legal Compliance

Consumers in the mobile ecosystem can putatively protect their privacy with the use of application permissions. However, this requires the mobile device owners to understand permissions and their privacy implications. Yet, few consumers appreciate the nature of permissions within the mobile ecosystem, often failing to appreciate the privacy permissions that are altered when updating an app. Even more concerning is the lack of understanding of the wide use of third-party libraries, most which are installed with automatic permissions, that is permissions that must be granted to allow the application to function appropriately. Unsurprisingly, many of these third-party permissions violate consumers’ privacy expectations and thereby, become “over-privileged” to the user. Consequently, an obscurity of privacy expectations between what is practiced by the private sector and what is deemed appropriate by the public sector is exhibited. Despite the growing attention given to privacy in the mobile ecosystem, legal literature has largely ignored the implications of mobile permissions. This article seeks to address this omission by analyzing the impacts of mobile permissions and the privacy harms experienced by consumers of mobile applications. The authors call for the review of industry self-regulation and the overreliance upon simple notice and consent. Instead, the authors set out a plan for greater attention to be paid to socio-technical solutions, focusing on better privacy protections and technology embedded within the automatic permission-based application ecosystem

How WEIRD is Usable Privacy and Security Research? (Extended Version)

In human factor fields such as human-computer interaction (HCI) and psychology, researchers have been concerned that participants mostly come from WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) countries. This WEIRD skew may hinder understanding of diverse populations and their cultural differences. The usable privacy and security (UPS) field has inherited many research methodologies from research on human factor fields. We conducted a literature review to understand the extent to which participant samples in UPS papers were from WEIRD countries and the characteristics of the methodologies and research topics in each user study recruiting Western or non-Western participants. We found that the skew toward WEIRD countries in UPS is greater than that in HCI. Geographic and linguistic barriers in the study methods and recruitment methods may cause researchers to conduct user studies locally. In addition, many papers did not report participant demographics, which could hinder the replication of the reported studies, leading to low reproducibility. To improve geographic diversity, we provide the suggestions including facilitate replication studies, address geographic and linguistic issues of study/recruitment methods, and facilitate research on the topics for non-WEIRD populations.Comment: This paper is the extended version of the paper presented at USENIX SECURITY 202

What did I really vote for? On the usability of verifiable e-voting schemes

E-voting has been embraced by a number of countries, delivering benefits in terms of efficiency and accessibility. End-to-end verifiable e-voting schemes facilitate verification of the integrity of individual votes during the election process. In particular, methods for cast-as-intended verification enable voters to confirm that their cast votes have not been manipulated by the voting client. A well-known technique for effecting cast-as-intended verification is the Benaloh Challenge. The usability of this challenge is crucial because voters have to be actively engaged in the verification process. In this paper, we report on a usability evaluation of three different approaches of the Benaloh Challenge in the remote e-voting context. We performed a comparative user study with 95 participants. We conclude with a recommendation for which approaches should be provided to afford verification in real-world elections and suggest usability improvements

“It’s Shocking!": Analysing the Impact and Reactions to the A3: Android Apps Behaviour Analyser

The lack of privacy awareness in smartphone ecosystems prevents users from being able to compare apps in terms of privacy and from making informed privacy decisions. In this paper we analysed smartphone users' privacy perceptions and concerns based on a novel privacy enhancing tool called Android Apps Behaviour Analyser (A3). The A3 tool enables user to behaviourally analyse the privacy aspects of their installed apps and notifies about potential privacy invasive activities. To examine the capabilities of A3 we designed a user study. We captured and contrasted privacy concern and perception of 52 participants, before and after using our tool. The results showed that A3 enables users to easily detect their smartphone app's privacy violation activities. Further, we found that there is a significant difference between users' privacy concern and expectation before and after using A3 and the majority of them were surprised to learn how often their installed apps access personal resources. Overall, we observed that the A3 tool was capable the influence the participants' attitude towards protecting their privacy