Designing usable and secure software with IRIS and CAIRIS.

Everyone expects the products and services they use to be secure, but 'building security in' at the earliest stages of a system's design also means designing for use as well. Software that is unusable to end-users and unwieldy to developers and administrators may be insecure as errors and violations may expose exploitable vulnerabilities. This book shows how practitioners and researchers can build both security and usability into the design of systems. It introduces the IRIS framework and the open source CAIRIS platform that can guide the specification of secure and usable software. It also illustrates how IRIS and CAIRIS can complement techniques from User Experience, Security Engineering and Innovation & Entrepreneurship in ways that allow security to be addressed at different stages of the software lifecycle without disruption. Real-world examples are provided of the techniques and processes illustrated in this book, making this text a resource for practitioners, researchers, educators, and students

Finding and Resolving Security Misusability with Misusability Cases

Although widely used for both security and usability concerns, scenarios used in security design may not necessarily inform the design of usability, and vice- versa. One way of using scenarios to bridge security and usability involves explicitly describing how design deci- sions can lead to users inadvertently exploiting vulnera- bilities to carry out their production tasks. This paper describes how misusability cases, scenarios that describe how design decisions may lead to usability problems sub- sequently leading to system misuse, address this problem. We describe the related work upon which misusability cases are based before presenting the approach, and illus- trating its application using a case study example. Finally, we describe some findings from this approach that further inform the design of usable and secure systems

Proceedings of the Designing interactive secure systems workshop (DISS 2012).

In recent years, the field of usable security has attracted researchers from HCI and Information Security, and led to a better understanding of the interplay between human factors and security mechanisms. Despite these advances, designing systems which are both secure in, and appropriate for, their contexts of use continues to frustrate both researchers and practitioners. One reason is a misunderstanding of the role that HCI can play in the design of secure systems. A number of eminent security researchers and practitioners continue to espouse the need to treat people as the weakest link, and encourage designers to build systems that Homer Simpson can use. Unfortunately, treating users as a problem can limit the opportunities for innovation when people are engaged as part of a solution. Similarly, while extreme characters (such as Homer) can be useful for envisaging different modes of interaction, when taken out of context they risk disenfranchising the very people the design is meant to support. Better understanding the relationship between human factors and the design of secure systems is an important step forward, but many design research challenges still remain. There is growing evidence that HCI design artefacts can be effective at supporting secure system design, and that some alignment exists between HCI, security, and software engineering activities. However, more is needed to understand how broader insights from the interactive system design and user experience communities might also find traction in secure design practice. For these insights to lead to design practice innovation, we also need usability and security evaluation activities that better support interaction design, together with software tools that augment, rather than hinder, these design processes. Last, but not least, we need to share experiences and anecdotes about designing usable and secure systems, and reflect on the different ways of performing and evaluating secure interaction design research. The objective of this workshop is to act as a forum for those interested in the design of interactive secure systems. By bringing together a like-minded community of researchers and practitioners, we hope to share knowledge gleaned from recent research, as well as experiences designing secure and usable systems in practice

Design as Code: Facilitating Collaboration between Usability and Security Engineers using CAIRIS

Designing usable and secure software is hard with- out tool-support. Given the importance of requirements, CAIRIS was designed to illustrate the form tool-support for specifying usable and secure systems might take. While CAIRIS supports a broad range of security and usability engineering activities, its architecture needs to evolve to meet the workflows of these stakeholders. To this end, this paper illustrates how CAIRIS and its models act as a vehicle for collaboration between usability and security engineers. We describe how the modified architecture of CAIRIS facilitates this collaboration, and illustrate the tool using three usage scenarios

Security through usability: a user-centered approach for balanced security policy requirements.

Security policy authors face a dilemma. On one hand, policies need to respond to a constantly evolving, well reported threat landscape, the consequences of which have heightened the security awareness of senior managers. On the other hand, the impact of policies extend beyond constraints on desktop computers and laptops; an overly constrained policy may compromise operations or stifle the freedom needed for staff to innovate. Because few people are fired for making a policy too secure, as long as usability continues to be treated as a trade-off quality together with functionality then policies will err on the side of constraint over freedom of action. Existing work argues that balanced security can be achieved using Requirements Engineering best practice. Such approaches, however, treat usability as another class of quality requirement, and prescribed techniques fail to elicit or analyse empirical data with the same richness as those used by usability professionals. There is, therefore, a need to incorporates techniques from HCI into the task of specifying security, but without compromising Requirements Engineering practice. Recent work demonstrated how user-centered design and security requirements engineering techniques can be aligned; this approach was validated using a general system design project, where ample time was available to collect empirical data and run participatory requirements and risk workshops. The question remains whether such an approach scales for eliciting policy requirements where time is an imperative rather than a luxury

Identifying Implicit Vulnerabilities through Personas as Goal Models

When used in requirements processes and tools, personas have the potential to identify vulnerabilities resulting from misalignment between user expectations and system goals. Typically, however, this potential is unfulfilled as personas and system goals are captured with different mindsets, by different teams, and for different purposes. If personas are visualised as goal models, it may be easier for stakeholders to see implications of their goals being satisfied or denied, and designers to incorporate the creation and analysis of such models into the broader RE tool-chain. This paper outlines a tool-supported approach for finding implicit vulnerabilities from user and system goals by reframing personas as social goal models. We illustrate this approach with a case study where previously hidden vulnerabilities based on human behaviour were identified

Assessing system of systems information security risk with OASoSIS.

The term System of Systems (SoS) is used to describe the coming together of independent systems, collaborating to achieve a new or higher purpose. However, the SoS concept is often misunderstood within operational environments, providing challenges towards the secure design and operation of SoSs. Limitations in existing literature indicates a need for discovery towards identifying a combination of concepts, models, and techniques suitable for assessing SoS security risk and related human factor concerns for SoS Requirements Engineering. In this article, we present OASoSIS, representing an information security risk assessment and modelling process to assist risk-based decision making in SoS Requirements Engineering. A characterisation process is introduced to capture the SoS context, supporting a SoS security risk assessment process that extends OCTAVE Allegro towards a SoS context. Resulting risk data provides a focused means to assess and model the SoS information security risk and related human factors, integrating tool-support using CAIRIS. A medical evacuation SoS case study scenario was used to test, illustrate, and validate the alignment of concepts, models, and techniques for assessing SoS information security risks with OASoSIS, where findings provide a positive basis for future work

Design as Code: Facilitating Collaboration between Usability and Security Engineers using CAIRIS

Designing usable and secure software is hard with- out tool-support. Given the importance of requirements, CAIRIS was designed to illustrate the form tool-support for specifying usable and secure systems might take. While CAIRIS supports a broad range of security and usability engineering activities, its architecture needs to evolve to meet the workflows of these stakeholders. To this end, this paper illustrates how CAIRIS and its models act as a vehicle for collaboration between usability and security engineers. We describe how the modified architecture of CAIRIS facilitates this collaboration, and illustrate the tool using three usage scenarios

Engaging stakeholders in security design: an assumption-driven approach.

System stakeholders fail to engage with security until comparatively late in the design and development process. User Experience artefacts like personas and scenarios create this engagement, but creating and contextualising them is difficult without real-world, empirical data; such data cannot be easily elicited from disengaged stakeholders. This paper presents an approach for engaging stakeholders in the elicitation and specification of security requirements at a late-stage of a system's design; this approach relies on assumption-based personas and scenarios, which are aligned with security and requirements analysis activities. We demonstrate this approach by describing how it was used to elicit security requirements for a medical research portal

Assessing System of Systems Security Risk and Requirements with OASoSIS

When independent systems come together as a System of Systems (SoS) to achieve a new purpose, dealing with requirements conflicts across systems becomes a challenge. Moreover, assessing and modelling security risk for independent systems and the SoS as a whole is challenged by a gap in related research and approaches within the SoSs domain. In this paper, we present an approach for bridging SoS and Requirements Engineering by identifying aligning SoSs concepts to assess and model security risk and requirements. We introduce our OASoSIS approach modifying OCTAVE Allegro for SoSs using CAIRIS (Computer Aided Integration of Requirements and Information Security) with a medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) SoS exemplar for Security Requirements Engineering tool-support. Index Terms—System of Systems, Security, Risk, Human Factors, Requirements Engineering, CAIRIS